HE 


UC-NRtF 


C   El    5b7 


^ 


'H/.-it^Hi 


Association  of  Railway  Executives 

CONFERENCE  COMMITTEE  OF  MANAGERS 


MISCELLANEOUS   STATEMENTS,  ETC. 


IN  CONNECTION 
WITH  HEARINGS  BEFORE  THE 


United  States  Railroad  Labor  Board 


CONCERNING  THE  VARIOUS 


NATIONAL   AGREEMENTS 


AND  THE 


RULES  AND  W^ORKING  CONDITIONS  REQUESTED 
BY  VARIOUS  ORGANIZATIONS 


INDEX  Pages 

Opening  Statement  of  the  Conference  Committee  of  Managers 2  to    5 

Abolition  of  Piece-Work 6  to  13 

Decisions  of  Various  Boards  of  Adjustment  having  reference  to  re-instatement  of  employees 14 

Methods  of  Pay  used  in  Analogous  Industries 15  and  16 

Construction  placed  on  Shop  Rules  Nos.  153  and  154 17  to  20 

Statement  of  Mr.  B.  M.  Jewell,  January  10,  1921 21  to  24 

Statement  of  Mr.  E.  T.  Whiter,  January  10,  1921 25 

Statement  of  Gen.  W.  W.  Atterbury,  January  31,  1921 26  and  27 

Statement  of  Mr.  J.  G.  Luhrsen,  January  31,  1921 28 

Statement  of  Mr.  E.  T.  Whiter,  February  3,  192 1 29 

Correspondence  relating  to  requests  of  the  Transportation  Organizations  and  the  Switchmen's  Union 31  to  39 

Closing  Statement  of  the  Conference  Committee  of  Managers 40  and  41 

Resolution  of  the  United  States  Railroad  Labor  Board  dated  February  9, 1921,  read  into  record  February  10, 1921.   42  and  43 
Statement  of  Mr.  Frank  P.  Walsh  on  behalf  of  the  employees  February  10,  1921 ; 44  to  50 


H^ 


.■Vfi 


^« 


4' 


OPENmG  STATEMENT 

Before  going  into  the  detailed  reasons  for  our  objections  to  the  continuation,  perpetuation  or  adoption  of  "National 
Agreements",  we  want  to  make  it  clear  to  the  Board  that  the  railroads  do  not  object  to  schedules  properly  negotiated  and 
entered  into  with  their  own  employees,  as  is  evidenced  by  the  fact  that  nearly  all,  if  not  all,  of  the  roads  represented  by 
this  Committee,  have  had  schedules  with  the  various  train  service  organizations  for  many  years;  all  these  schedules  were 
made  by  direct  negotiations  except  as  affected  by  concerted  movements  and  arbitrations  as  described  in  our  presentation 
of  May  18,  1920  (pages  2152  to  2155  of  the  proceedings),  and  the  railroads  will  continue  to  work  under  them  unless  changed 
as  provided  for  therein.  Prior  to  Federal  control,  some  roads  had  schedules  with  other  classes  of  their  employees;  many 
had  no  schedules  with  any  crafts  other  than  the  train  service  organizations,  but  there  were  no  so-called  "National  Agree- 
ments" which  made  all  rules  uniformly  the  same  throughout  the  Country.  All  roads  that  did  have  schedules  directly 
negotiated  them  to  fit  their  own  conditions  with  their  own  men,  who  in  some  cases  were  assisted  by  Grand  Lodge  officers, 
excepting  the  schedule  covering  the  Shop  Crafts  on  twelve  Southeastern  Roads,  yet  in  every  case  the  railroads  had  the 
undisputed  right  to  negotiate  their  own  schedules,  which  was  denied  during  Federal  control. 

Under  Governmental  control  the  railroads  were  unified  and  considered  as  one,  and  the  Director  General  entered  into 
so-called  "National  Agreements"  with  the  Shopmen,  Maintenance  of  Way  employees.  Clerks,  Firemen  and  Oilers,  and 
Signalmen.  The  first  of  these  so-called  "National  Agreements"  was  made  with  the  Shop  Crafts  less  than  six  months, 
and  the  last,  that  with  the  Signalmen,  only  a  few  days  before  the  return  of  the  roads  to  their  owners.  The  railroads 
had  no  voice  in  their  making,  and  cannot  be  considered  as  bound  by  agreements  made  by  the  Federal  Administration  for 
the  period  of  Federal  control.  These  agreements  which  were  of  universal  application  for  the  period  of  Federal  control, 
were  specifically  recognized  by  the  parties  signatory  thereto  as  effective  during  this  period  only,  and  contain  nothing  that 
would  impose  such  obligation  upon  all  roads  alike  after  individual  responsibility  had  to  be  assumed  by  the  separate  rail- 
roads for  their  successful  operation  as  separate  properties. 

Therefore,  we  contend  that  under  private  control,  consideration  must  necessarily  be  given  to  the  conditions  and 
peculiarities  of  operation  on  the  individual  properties  in  the  preparation  of  any  regulations  governing  the  working  con- 
ditions of  employees  of  those  properties.  The  only  parties  who  are  fully  qualified  to  consider  such  regulations  are  the 
individual  managements  and  their  employees. 

Many  of  the  rules  in  the  so-called  "National  Agreements"  are  so  ultra-restrictive  that  they  positively  prevent  reason- 
ably economical  operations,  and  result  in  serious  interference  with  efficiency  and  production.  There  should  be  no  such 
interference  with  the  responsibility  of  the  Managements  as  might  unreasonably  impair  the  efficient  and  economical  oper- 
ation of  the  properties,  of  which  responsibility  the  Managements  cannot  divest  themselves,  and  which  responsibility  is 
specifically  placed  upon  them  by  the  provisions  of  Section  422,  Sub-titles  Nos.  2  and  3  of  the  Transportation  Act,  1920, 
in  the  following  language:  ' 

"(2)  In  the  exercise  of  its  power  to  prescribe  just  and  reasonable  rates  the  Commission  shall  initiate,  modify, 
establish  or  adjust  such  rates  so  that  carriers  as  a  whole  (or  as  a  whole  in  each  of  such  rate  groups  or  territories  as 
the  Commission  may  from  time  to  time  desigt^te)  will,  UNDER  HONEST,  EFFICIENT  AND  ECONOMICAL 
MANAGEMENT  and  reasonable  expenditures  for  maintenance  of  way,  structures  and  equipment,  earn  an 
aggregate  annual  net  railway  operating  income  equal,  as  nearly  as  may  be,  to  a  fair  return  upon  the  aggregate  value 
of  the  railway  property  of  such  carriers  held  for  and  used  in  the  service  of  transportation;  PROVIDED,  That  the 
Commission  shall  have  reasonable  latitude  to  modify  or  adjust  any  particular  rate  which  it  may  find  to  be  unjust 
or  unreasonable,  and  to  prescribe  different  rates  for  different  sections  of  the  country. 

"(3)  The  Commission  shall  from  time  to  time  determine  and  make  public  what  percentage  of  such  aggregate 
property  value  constitutes  a  fair  return  thereon,  and  such  percentage  shall  be  uniform  for  all  rate  groups  or  terri- 
tories which  may  be  designated  by  the  Commission.  In  making  such  determination  it  shall  give  due  consideration 
among  other  things,  to  the  transportation  needs  of  the  country  and  the  necessity  (UNDER  HONEST,  EFFI- 
CIENT AND  ECONOMICAL  MANAGEMENT  OF  THE  EXISTING  TRANSPORTATION  FACILITIES) 
of  enlarging  such  facilities  in  order  to  provide  the  people  of  the  United  States  with  adequate  transportation;  PRO- 
VIDED, That  during  the  two  years  beginning  March  1,  1920,  the  Commission  shall  take  as  such  fair  return  a  sum 
equal  to  5K  per  centum  of  such  aggregate  value,  but  may,  in  its  discretion,  add  thereto  a  sum  not  exceeding 
one-half  of  one  per  centum  of  such  aggregate  value  to  make  provision  in  whole  or  in  part  for  improvements,  better- 
ments or  equipment,  which,  according  to  the  accounting  system  prescribed  by  the  Commission,  are  chargeable 
to  capital  account." 

Considering  the  responsibility  upon  the  individual  properties,  and  the  variable  conditions  which  are  encountered 
in  the  different  sections  of  a  country  so  large  as  the  United  States,  we  feel  confident  that  the  Board  will  recognize  the  justi- 
fication for  considering  such  variable  conditions  which  we  hold  makes  impracticable  the  universal  application  of  the 
provisions  of  the  so-called  "National  Agreements". 

507506 


I 


By  reference  to  the  coMp^Idftorl  '"Official  Interpretations  of  the  Rules  of  the  National  Agreement"  (covering  the 
Shop  Crafts),  it  will  be  noted  that  questions  arose  as  to  the  intent  of  the  larger  proportion  of  the  rules.  In  numerous 
cases  the  answers  were  to  the  effect  that  the  rules  are  clear  as  written  and  there  is  no  necessity  for  interpretations.  To 
this  attitude  we  take  pronounced  exceptions.  • 

We  hold  that  many  of  the  rules  are  so  worded  that  they  are  capable  of  various  constructions  and  have  resulted  in  so- 
called  Interpretations  which  are  in  fact  new  rules;  others  are  impractical  of  application  without  incurring  excessive  penalties. 
Notwithstanding  the  parties  who  prepared  the  rules  may  have  considered  them  clear  as  written,  experience  in  trying  to 
work  under  them  has  demonstrated  that  they  have  resulted  in  extraordinarily  numerous  questions  from  both  the  employees 
and  the  Managements.     This  in  itself,  makes  the  rules  particularly  objectionable. 

•  We  respectfully  ask,  therefore,  that  this  Honorable  Board  leave  the  individual  roads  free  to  negotiate  their  own 
schedules,  so  as  best  to  meet  justly  the  widely  varying  conditions  on  the  different  roads.  We  hold  that  this  principle  is 
recognized  in  Section  301  of  the  Transportation  Act  itself,  which  provides  that  the  railroads  and  their  employees  shall 
negotiate  directly  with  each  other  to  the  fullest  extent  before  referring  questions  at  issue  to  other  tribunals. 

The  so-called  "National  Agreement"  covering  the  Shop  Crafts  provides  that  the  rules  contained  therein  apply  to  all 
employees  of  any  particular  craft  regardless  of  the  department  in  which  employed.  For  example:  Steam  Fitters,  Plumb- 
ers, Water  Service  Repairmen  and  other  Pipe  Fitters,  Tinsmiths,  Electricians,  Metal  Bridgemen,  Blacksmiths,  Machinists, 
Bench  Carpenters,  Cabinet  Makers,  etc.,  employed  in  the  Maintenance  of  Way  Department,  and  having  no  interest  in 
or  connection  with  the  Maintenance  of  Equipment  Department,  are  nevertheless,  subject  to  the  rules  of  the  Maintenance 
of  Equipment  Department  and  are  represented  by  the  Committee  of  that  Department.  Under  these  conditions  portions 
of  gangs  are  necessarily  governed  by  one  set  of  rules  and  other  portions  of  the  same  gangs  by  another,  which  is  obviously 
wholly  wrong  in  principle  and  practice. 

The  seniority  rules  for  certain  mechanical  crafts  limit  them  to  the  place  where  employed,  while  rules  of  the  Main- 
tenance Department  where  these  employees  are  engaged,  usually  provide  territorial  seniority,  thus  producing  an  undesir- 
able and  in  fact  impracticable  situation.  Employees  of  each  department  should  be  separate  and  distinct  from  the  em- 
ployees of  any  other  department,  and  should  be  governed  entirely  by  the  rules  or  schedules  of  the  department  in  which 
they  are  employed.  The  rules  governing  employees  engaged  in  Maintenance  of  Way  and  Structures  should  be  especially 
prepared  for  and  adapted  to  that  department.  There  should  be  no  division  of  jurisdiction.  It  is  true  that  certain  mechan- 
ical work  is  required  in  the  Maintenance  of  Way  Department.  Nearly  all  of  it  is  road  work,  performed  under  entirely 
different  conditions  than  prevail  in  shops  and  shop  rules  are  not  applicable.  The  employees  who  perform  this  work  must 
be  trained,  supervised  and  promoted  by  the  officials  of  the  department  in  which  they  are  employed,  in  order  to  secure 
that  efficiency,  economy  and  dispatch  which  is  essential  to  good  management  and  the  proper  discharge,  by  the  railroads, 
of  their  duties  as  common  carriers. 

Rules  agreed  upon  by  the  individual  railroads  with  their  employees  can  be  so  constructed  as  to  give  employees  who 
are  members  of  the  same  craft,  but  employed  in  different  departments,  all  of  the  protection  to  which  they  are  justly  entitled . 

Those  roads,  represented  by  this  Committee,  which  have  been  -working  on  the  eight-hour  day  basis,  will  continue 
to  do  so  unless  changed  by  mutual  agreement  with  their  employees  as  outlined  in  your  Decision  No.  2,  and  will  apply  the 
rates  awarded  in  that  decision,  but  they  must  have  the  right  to  re-establish  more  efficient  and  economical  practices,  when 
it  is  found  desirable  and  practicable  to  do  so.-  We  refer,  among  other  things,  to  piece-work  methods  which  were  abolished. 
This  action  has  cost  many  millions  of  dollars  to  the  roads  which  had  for  years  succfessfuUy  produced  much  of  their  output 
by  piece  work  methods.  This  excess  cost,  which  is  really  a  loss  to  th*  railroads,  is  piling  up  day  after  day  and  will  con- 
tinue to  do  so  as  long  as  the  railroads  are  prevented  from  re-establishing  the  piece  work  basis  and  until  the  railroads  are 
free  to  re-establish  such  former  practices  they  will  not  be  able  to  comply  wholly  with  the  requirements  of  Section  422,  Sub- 
Titles  2  and  3  of  the  Transportation  Act,  1920,  heretofore  quoted.  By  this  method  the  output  of  the  shop  is  increased,  and 
the  workmen  on  account  of  their  ability  and  skill  are  afforded  opportunity  for  receiving  increased  compensation  over  and 
above  what  they  would  receive  working  on  the  day  basis.  The  piece  work  method  is  well  recognized  as  being  the  most 
efficient  method  of  operation  and  proof  of  this  is  the  large  number  of  manufacturing  plants  throughout  the  United  States 
which  are  working  on  a  piece  work  basis  and  further  proof  that  many  men  desire  piece  work,  is  that,  when  this  method 
of  pay  was  abolished,  a  great  many  employees  left  the  railroad  shops  and  entered  the  service  of  car  building  and  other 
manufacturing  plants  where  the  piece  work  system  of  pay  was  in  effect.  Among  the  elements  set  forth  in  the  Transporta- 
tion Act  for  determining  rates  of  pay  is  Item  4,  Section  307 — "The  training  and  skill  required."  We  hold  that  the  piece- 
work system  of  pay  affords  a  specific  basis  for  compensating  employees  under  this  requirement,  which  at  the  same  time  is 
just  and  reasonable. 

The  railroads  must  have  relief  from  rules  controlling  the  employment- of  men,  which  are  so  restrictive  as  to  prevent 
them  from  obtaining  a  sufficient  number  of  employees  in  certain  departments,  thus  further  restricting  output  and  causing 
delay  to  the  movement  of  traffic. 

The  objections  to  the  various  unduly  restrictive  rules  and  rules  which  provide  pay  for  work  not  performed,  will  be 
pointed  out  for  the  information  of  the  Board  as  we  progress  in  our  submission. 

The  organizations,  in  addition  to  asking  for  the  continuation  of  the  so-called  "National  Agreements",  also  ask  that 
'  the  various  interpretations  thereto,  and  supplements  and  addenda  issued  by  the  Federal  Administration  including  Decisions 


of  the  various  Boards  of  Adjustment,  be  also  continued  in  effect.     We  shall  endeavor  to  show  at  the  proper  times  the 
further  punitive  and  restrictive  conditions  imposed  upon  the  carriers  by  some  of  these  interpretations,  supplements,  etc. 

There  are  rules  that  are  not  objectionable,  which  the  individual  roads  would  consent  to  adopt,  but,  even  with  regard 
to  such  rules,  we  contend  for  the  principle  which  will  recognize  the  right  of  the  railroad  officers  to  negotiate  their  schedules 
with  their  own  employees. 

Each  of  the  so-called  "National  Agreements"  provides: 

"It  is  understood  that  this  agreement  does  not  annul  agreements  already  in  effect  with  othei*  organizations 
unless  'and  until  a  majority  of  the  employees  concerned  express  a  desire  for  a  change." 

Prior  to  Federal  control,  on  certain  railroads  the  Organizations  parties  to  the  so-called  "National  Agreements"  did 
not  represent  the  employees ;  in  fact,  on  some  of  such  roads  no  organizations  represented  them;  on  others,  while  no  schedules 
were  in  effect,  the  employees  were  members  of  other  organizations.  Notwithstanding  the  employees  do  not  desire  the  organ- 
izations listed  to  represent  them,  because  the  organizations  of  which  they  are  members  held  no  schedule,  the  organizations 
listed  claim  the  contract  applies  on  such  properties.  When  the  railroads  were  unified  under  Federal  control,  the  principle 
that  the  majority  should  govern  may  have  justified  the  claim  to  a  certain  extent,  but  as  each  railroad  is  now  a  unit,  the 
situation  on  each  railroad  should  govern. 

The  fact  that  100  per  cent  of  the  employees  on  one  railroad  may  be  members  of  the  designated  organizations,  can 
have  no  effect  whatever  on  another  railroad  where  less  than  50  per  cent,  of  the  employees  are  members.  The  Manage- 
ment of  each  railroad  has  to  meet  the  conditions  thereon,  and  the  situation  on  another  property  can  be  of  no  advantage 
or  detriment  to  it. 

On  at  least  one  railroad,  the  majority  of  one  craft  at  each  location  are  members  of  another  organization;  at  their  prin- 
cipal shop,  for  the  other  crafts  the  situation  is  mixed — the  majority  of  certain  crafts  are  members  of  the  organizations 
listed,  while  the  majority  of  other  crafts  are  members  of  a  rival  organization.  The  majority  of  all  the  employees  at  this 
shop  are  members  of  the  rival  organization.  To  decide  by  crafts  for  the  system  who  shall  represent  the  employees  would 
make  the  majority  at  certain  locations  subject  to  the  will  of  the  minority,  to  which  they  are  strongly  protesting;  in  fact, 
there  are  cases  where  the  employees  positively  refuse  to  be  subject  to  the  provisions  of  the  so-called  "National  Agreement". 

We  believe  that  the  Board  should  not  approach  this  subject  from  the  angle  of  a  schedule  with  any  organization;  or 
that  the  Board  can  properly  say  what  organizations  shall  or  shall  not  represent  the  employees.  The  subject  should  be 
dealt  with  from  the  standpoint  of  what  are  proper  regulations  for  the  character  of  service  under  consideration,  and  that 
the  question  of  whether  they  shall  be  applied  on  the  individual  properties,  in  the  form  of  a  schedule  with  certain  organiza- 
tions, depends  upon  the  policy  of  the  individual  property  and  the  desire  of  the  majority  of  the  respective  classes  of  em- 
ployees on  that  property. 

In  line  with  the  preceding  paragraph,  we  desire  to  call  the  attention  of  the  Board  to  the  so-called  "National  Agree- 
ment" of  the  Stationary  Firemen  and  Oilers,  which  was  executed  January  16,  1920,  only  one  month  and  a  half  before  the 
return  of  the  roads  to  private  control.  So  far  as  we  have  been  able  to  learn,  this  Organization  had  no  contract  on  a  single 
road  prior  to  the  so-called  "National  Agreement",  and  has,  so  far  as  we  can  learn,  only  a  very  limited  membership  on  but 
very  few  of  the  roads  represented  by  this  Committee.  It  would  be  manifestly  unfair  not  only  to  the  Management  but 
to  the  employees  on  roads  where  this  Organization  is  not  represented,  or  where  their  membership  is  in  the  minority,  to 
place  them  under  the  rules  and  control  of  that  Organization. 

As  will  be  brought  out  under  the  rules  of  other  so-called  "National  Agreements"  apparently  many  of  them  are  taken 
from  the  so-called  "National  Agreement"  covering  the  shop  employees.  The  preponderating  work  of  the  shop  employees 
is  at  fixed  points,  while  the  preponderating  work  of  the  Maintenance  of  Way  and  Signal  Department  employees  covers 
considerable  distances  and  ranges  of  territory.  The  rules  of  the  shop  agreement  covering  the  use  of  the  employees  away 
from  the  fixed  points  apply  only  in  emergency,  while  similar  rules  for  Signal  Department  and  Maintenance  of  Way  Em- 
ployees, if  applied  to  them,  would  be  effective  in  the  preponderating  or  characteristic  conditions  of  the  service.  To  extend 
to  the  preponderating  or  typical  conditions  in  any  department,  rules  of  another  department  which  are  applied  only  under 
emergency  or  exceptional  conditions,  is  wholly  unreasonable  and  unjust,  and  we  hold  that  the  Management  of  no  railroad, 
if  free  to  negotiate  its  own  schedule,  could  justify  the  granting  of  such  rules  and  that  the  imposition  upon  the  Managements 
of  rules  which  disregard  the  conditions  attaching  to  the  service  would  make  it  impossible  for  the  Managements  to  meet 
and  discharge  their  responsibility  for  the  honest,  efficient  and  economical  operation  of  their  properties.  Rules  should  be 
practicable  of  application  without  incurring  penalties;  any  rules  which  are  impracticable  of  application,  and  which  con- 
sequently result  in  penalty  payments  under  ordinary  conditions,  are  unsound,  unreasonable  and  uneconomical  and  should 
be  emphatically  declined. 

The  proposed  so-called  New  "National  Agreement"  served  upon  the  Roads  by  the  Maintenance  of  Way  organization 
is  more  drastic  and  restrictive  than  the  one  given  that  Organization  by  the  United  States  Railroad  Administration. 

*         . 

This  Committee  contended  at  various  times  during  the  wage  hearings  that  the  consideration  of  the  request  made  by 

the  organization  representatives  for  the  continuation  or  perpetuation  of  the  so-called  "National  Agreements"  was  not 
properly  before  the  Board  in  connection  with  the  wage  issue  because  from  our  point  of  view  the  spirit  and  intent  of  Section 
301  of  the  Transportation  Act  had  not  been  complied  with,  except  on  some  of  the  Southeastern  roads  and  perhaps  one  or 
two  others  where  the  Managements  agreed  with  the  organization  representatives  to  refer  the  matter  to  this  Board  for  decision. 


The  organizations  have  submitted  to  'the  Board  a  large  hst  of  railroads  on  all  of  which  they  claim  that  the  require- 
ments of  Section  301  of  the  Act  have  been  fulfilled.  We  cannot  agree  with  such  claims.  We  cannot  believe  that  serving 
notice  upon  the  various  railroads  by  the  organization  committeemen  (who  stated  that  they  had  instructions  that  they 
might  discuss,  but  must  not  change  or  modify  in  any  manner,  provisions  of  proposed  schedules  providing  for  the  continua- 
tion of  the  so-called  "National  Agreements")  constitutes  the  character  of  negotiations  contemplated  by  Section  301  of  the 
Transportation  Act,  yet  this  was  the  method  of  procedure  followed  by  the  Organizations  which  held  "National  Agreements", 
and  which  their  representatives  claim  was  compliarce  with  the  Act,  and  so  certified  to  this  Board. 

In  Decision  No.  2  your  Honorable  Board  has  stated  that  further  hearings  on  the  question  of  rules,  working  conditions, 
and  schedules  will  be  held  and  a  decision  rendered  thereon  as  soon  thereafter  as  practicable.  We  firmly  believe  that  the 
Board  after  considering  our  foregoing  statements  supplemented  and  illustrated  by  the  following  detailed  analysis  of 
certain  of  the  rules,  will  be  convinced  that  the  widely  varying  conditions  on  the  different  railroads  can  be  properly  con- 
sidered and  disposed  of  only  by  direct  negotiations  on  the  individual  properties,  and  will  accordingly  deny  the  request  of 
the  employees  for  the  continuation  or  perpetuation  of  the  so-called  "National  Agreements",  together  with  the  interpretations 
and  rulings  thereon. 


ABOLITION  OF  PIECE  WORK 

Mention  was  made  several  times  yesterday  that  if  the  employees  were  permitted  to  use  their  own 
discretion,  or  if  influence  was  not  used  to  prevent  them  from  using  their  own  discretion  and  making  their 
own  selection,  that  there  would  not  be  much  opposition  by  the  men  to  the  piecework  method  of  pay.  We 
will  read  into  the  records  here  the  following  which  appears  in  Official  Circular  No.  86  issued  by  the  Railway 
Employees'  Department  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  under  date  of  December  30,  1918: 

LETTER  ON  ABOLITION  OF  PIECEWORK 

"Mr.  W.  S.  Carter,  Director,  "December  27,  1918. 

"Division  of  Labor, 

"I.  C.  C.  Building,  City. 
"Dear  Sir: 

"Under  date  of  November  4  we  addressed  a  communication  to  the  Director  General  on  the 
subject  of  abolishing  piecework  on  all  railroads,  urging  that  this  action  be  taken  in  the  form  ' 
of  a  General  Order  in  compliance  with  the  expressed  desire  of  the  members  of  our  organizations 
who  have  been  compelled  to  work  under  the  piecework  system.  In  the  same  letter  we  also  em- 
bodied a  request  that  all  piece  workers  be  granted  at  least  13  cents  per  hour  above  their  piece- 
work earnings  as  shown  by  pay  roll  records  of  December,  1917,  this  increase  to  be  effective  from 
January  1,  1918,  up  to  and  including  the  date  when  piece^irork  would  be  abolished. 

"The  question  of  abolishing  piecework  and  the  insistent  demands  that  these  men  be  granted 
the  same  ratio  of  increase  as  given  to  all  hourly  workers,  rendering  the  same  class  of  service  in 
the  same  trade  and  shop,  together  with  the  proper  application  of  the  awards  to  the  employees 
who  were  previously  receiving  a  bonus  and  was  cancelled  without  due  notice,  have  been  burning 
questions  for  several  months  back,  and  in  fact  since  the  issuance  of  Supplement  No.  4  on  July  25. 
We  have  taken  this  matter  up  with  the  several  divisions  of  the  Railroad  Administration  repeatedly, 
but  up  to  the  present  time  no  definite  results  have  been  secured. 

"In  order  to  retain  control  of  the  membership  who  are  now  more  determined  than  even  that 
piecework  shall  be  abolished  from  all  systems,  the  delay  in  adjustment  of  these  matters  materially 
,  contributing  to  this  state  of  feeling,  we  have  found  it  necessary  to  issue  a  circular  letter  to  all 
system  federations  advising  that  a  meeting  be  called  for  the  purpose  of  deciding  on  date  of  notice 
to  be  served  on  the  railroad  officials  when  piecework  will  be  discontinued.  These  instructions 
are  being  carried  out  on  all  roads  where  the  piecework  practice  is  in  effect,  and  the  members  are 
warned  against  any  suspension  of  work,  or  reduction  of  output,  the  change  to  be  brought  about 
without  in  any  way  affecting  the  efficiency  of  the  service. 

"We  would  rather  have  preferred  a  settlement  of  this  question  in  a  more  orderly  manner, 
feeling,  however,  that  the  only  course  offering  relief  has  been  followed. 

"May  we  again  urge  upon  you  the  necessity  of  hastening  all  possible  the  interpretations  of 
the  orders  as  they  apply  to  pieceworkers  and  bonus  payments  in  order  to  enable  us  to  make  some 
report  to  the  membership  on  these  questions  which  have  been  so  seriously  delayed,  and  have 
already  exhausted  all  patience.  We  understand  that  the  decisions  have  been  in  the  hands  of 
the  Director  General  for  some  time,  and  should  in  our  opinion  have  satisfactorily  settled  these 
matters  without  entailing  the  dissatisfaction  that  now  exists. 

"Trusting  you  will  fully  appreciate  our  desire  to  secure  an  early  decision  of  these  matters  and 
hoping  to  be  advised  of  action  taken,  I  am, 

,  .  "Yours  very  truly, 

"B.  M.  JEWELL, 
"Acting  President  Railway  Employees'  Department." 


HONOR  ROLL— ABOLITION  OF  PIECEWORK 

"In  order  to  secure  accurate  information  as  to  the  number  of  roads  abolishing  piece  work  and 
to  lend  encouragement  to  our  members  in  their  efforts  to  rid  themselves  of  the  accursed  practice, 
we  feel  that  it  is  not  only  appropriate  to  list  under  this  heading,  but  believe  by  this  means  the 
information  gathered  will  be  of  much  value  to  all  concerned". 

"We  have  received  many  letters  from  time  to  time  advising  of  contemplated  action  on  this 
matter,  but  unfortunately  we  have  not  compiled  this  information  as  a  ready  reference.  The 
few  roads  hereunder  listed  represent  a  good  beginning,  but  by  no  means  complete  the  list  that 
properly  come  under  this  heading,  we  therefore  hope  that  no  offense  will  be  taken  if  some  have 
been  overlooked,  and  kindly  request  that  we  hear  from  you  on  this  matter  at  your  earliest  con- 
venience, filing  copy  of  all  correspondence  exchanged  on  the  subject  and  advising  of  present  status. 


'  In  view  of  tMe  importance  of  this  question  the  same  should  be  handled  as  a  system  federation 
and  not  as  a  local  matter.  It  should  also  be  understood  that  the  movement  is  supported  by  all 
of  the  federated  trades,  even  if  but  one  or  more  organizations  are  at  present  affected. 

"We  are  not  unmindful  of  the  fact  that  more  or  less  opposition  can  be  expected  from  the  officials 
on  some  roads  where  piecework  has  become  a  "hobby",  although  having  no  further  reason  to 
recommend  it,  other  than  forcing  upon  the  employees  a  condition  that  was  not  in  any  way  accept- 
able. We  have  confidence,  however,  in  the  judgment  of  the  officers  and  members  to  handle 
this  matter  with  tact  and  diplomacy  and  avoid  any  action  that  will  precipitate  either  suspension 
of  work  or  interfere  with  the  efficient  operation  of  the  road. 

"GET  YOUR  RAILROAD  ON  THE  HONOR  LIST 

"Baltimore  &  Ohio. 

"Delaware,  Lackawanna  &  Western. 

"Atlantic  Coast  Line,  ultimatum  has  been  served.  •    ' 

"Chicago,  Burlington  &  Quincy,  system  federation  has  served  notice  that  piecework  will  be 
discontinued  after  January  2, 

"New  York  Central  (Elkhart,  Ind.,  shops),  notice  served  by  employees  that  they  decline  to 
accept  piecework  cards  after  January  1." 


Further  in  this  same  connection  the  follbwing  appears  in  Official  Circular  No.  87  issued  by  the  Railway 
Employees'  Department  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  under  date  of  January  8,  1919: 

"Dear  Sirs  and  Brothers:  As  a  New  Year  greeting  we  are  pleased  to  quote  hereunder  a  copy 
of  telegram  from  Mr.  W.  G.  McAdoo  to  all  Regional  Directors,  which  we  feel  assured  will  sound 
the  death  knell  of  the  piecework  practice  on  all  railroads  if  our  members  are  truly  sincere  in 
their  desire  to  abolish  it  for  all  time.  We  feel  fully  convinced  that  prompt  and  conclusive  evidence 
will  not  be  found  wanting  in  clearly  demonstrating  this  fact." 


(Telegram) 

"Washington,  D.  C,  December  31,  1918. 

"A.  H.  Smith,  Regional  Director,  Eastern  Region,  New  York,  New  York. 
"C.  H.  Markham,  Regional  Director,  Allegheny  Region,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 
"N.  D.  Maher,  Regional  Director,  Pocohontas  Region,  Roanoke,  Va. 
"B.  I.  Winchell,  Regional  Director,  Southern  Region,  Atlanta,  Ga. 
"Hale  Holden,  Regional  Director,  Central  Western  Region,  Chicago,  111. 
"R.  H.  Aishton,  Regional  Director,  Northwestern  Region,  Chicago,  111. 
"B.  F.  Bush,  Regional  Director,  Southwestern  Region,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

"Evidence  has  been  presented  to  me  that  the  shop  men  throughout  the  country 
by  a  very  large  majority  have  expressed  a  preference  to  be  paid  on  the  hourly  basis 
as  provided  in  Supplement  No.  4  t.o  General  Order  No.  27,  rather  than  the  piece  work  basis 
which  is  in  effect  on  many  railroads.  It  is  entirely  agreeable  to  the  Railroad  Administra- 
tion for  the  hourly  basis,  which  it  has  established  as  reasonable,  to  be  adopted  when 
a  substantial  majority  of  the  employees  so  desire.  You  are  therefore  directed  to  discon- 
tinue piece  work  system  on  any  road  in  your  region  and  substitute  therefore  the  basis 
of  payment  provided  in  Supplement  No.  4  to  General  Order  No.  27,  whenever  a  sub- 
stantial majority  of  the  employees  desire  such  a  change.  It  is  important  that  this 
matter  be  handled  without  delay  or  hesitation  and  with  a  sympathetic  purpose  to  carry 
out  fully  the  spirit  of  these  instructions.  Please  see  that  all  officials  concerned  are 
properly  and  promptly  advised  so  that  they  may  act  without  delay  as  the  occasions 
arise. 

"(Signed)     W.  G.  McADOO" 


"With  this  information  at  hand  there  need  be  no  further  hesitation  on  the  part  of  the  members 
to  get  together  in  this  important  matter  and  make  their  position  clear   to    the    management. 

"We  have  mailed  a  copy  of  this  letter  to  each  system  federation  secretary  in  advance  of  having 
incorporated  in  this  circular,  and  would  therefore  request  the  secretaries  to  convey  the  informa- 
tion to  the  membership  of  all  crafts  at  all  points  on  the  system  to  the  end  that  prompt  measures 
be  taken  to  carry  out  the  following  instructions. 


"It  is  our  desire  to  canvass  the  situation  thoroughly  and  determine  without  question  of 
doubt  where  we  stand  on  this  question.  We  therefore  request  that  arrangements  be  made  to 
secure  a  complete  vote  of  all  shop  crafts,  whether  employed  on  piece  work  or  hourly  basis,  this 
vote  to  be  compiled  separately  for  each  craft,  and  also  giving  the  vote  separately  for  men  now 
working  piece  work  from  those  working  on  the  hourly  basis. 

"Name  of  craft. 

"Number  of  employees. 

"Number  of  piece  workers  voting  to  abolish. 

"Number  of  hourly  workers  voting  to  abolish. 

"The  result  of  this  vote  is  to  be  sent  to  the  chairman  of  craft  or  general  chairman  of  the  Sys- 
tem Federation,  who  will  compile  same  and  address  communication  to  the  Federal  Manager 
of  the  Railroad,  advising  him  of  the  expressed  desires  of  the  membership  and  requesting  a  con- 
ference for  the  federated  committee,  two  copies  of  all  correspondence  exchanged  on  this  subject 
to  be  furnished  this  department  in  order  that  we  may  handle  direct  with  the  administration. 

"Inasmuch  as  it  will  necessarily  take  some  time  to  adjust  the  forces  to  this  change,  you  are 
requested  to  give  the  management  at  least  15  days'  notice  after  the  vote  has  been  canvassed, 
the  maximum  time  limit  not  to  exceed  thirty  days. 

"In  conclusion  we  believe  it  will  not  be  amiss  to  remind  the  officers  and  members  that  your 
prompt  and  decisive  action  on  this  question  is  of  vital  concern  to  the  future  of  your  organization- 
We  have  waited  many  years  for  this  opportunity,  let  us  not  be  found  wanting.  Do  not  be  content 
with  a  majority  vote,  see  that  it  is  UNANIMOUS  and  that  nothing  is  left  undone  on  your  part 
to  make  it  so. 

"This  matter  is  now  in  your  hands  to  be  disposed  of,  it  therefore,  behooves  every  man  to 
be  up  and  doing,  if  we  would  successfully  cope  with  the  situation  and  effectively  eradicate  the 
last  vestige  of  the  accursed  piece  work  practice  from  every  railroad  in  this  country. 

"Wishing  you  every  success  and  eagerly  awaiting  the  results -of  your  efforts  in  this  matter. 

"Fraternally  yours, 

"B.  M.  JEWELL, 
"Acting  President. 

"JOHN  SCOTT 

"Secretary-Treasurer." 


"Since  the  issuance  of  telegram  from  Mr.  McAdoo  with  regard  to  abolishing  piece  work,  we 
have  received  advice  from  the  System  Federation  officersfon  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad  to  the 
effect  that  the  railroad  officials  were  about  to  poll  the  system  to  determine  whether  the  employes 
working  piece  work  desired  to  have  it  retained  or  abolished.  This  matter  has  been  taken  up 
with  the  administration  and  instructions  issued  to  the  Regional  Director  advising  that  it  is  not 
the  intent  or  purpose  for  the  railroad  officials  to  take  a  poll  on  this  question.  The  telegram  plainly 
states  that  when  the  request  is  made  by  a  substantial  majority  of  the  employees  to  abolish  the 
piecework  practice  it  shall  be  abolished.  We  therefore  request  that  this  matter  be  handled  in 
accordance  with  instructions  contained  in  the  above  circular  letter  and  that  you  permit  of  no 
intimidation  on  the  part  of  any  railroad  official  in  deciding  this  question." 


We  believe  that  it  is  propaganda  of  this  kind  which  influences  men  —  sometimes  against  their  own 
better  judgment. 

For  the  further  information  of  the  Board  we  will  also  read  into  the  record  at  this  time  a  copy  of  the 
report  of  the  officers  of  the  Railway  Employees'  Department  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  to  the 
officers  and  delegates  to  the  Fifth  Biennial  Convention  held  at  Kansas  City,  Mo.,  beginning  Monday, 
April  12,  1920,  in  which  appears  under  the  heading  "Abolition  of  Piece-Work",  the  following: 

ABOLITION  OF  PIECE  WORK 

"On  July  25th,  1918,  Supplement  No.  4  to  General  Order  No.  27  was  issued,  granting  to  all 
employees,  on  an  hourly  basis,  13  cents  additional  to  what  had  been  granted  under  General  Order 
No.  27. 

"Section  8  of  Article  4,  Supplement  4,  provided,  'Employees  on  piece  work  basis  shall  not 
receive  less  than  the  minimum  rate  per  hour  awarded  to  hourly  workers,  including  time  and  one- 
half  for  overtime.* 

8 


"This  section  was  construed  by  Board  of  Adjustment  No.  2  to  mean  that  the  13  cents  granted 
to  employees  by  Supplement  No.  4  applied  only  to  hourly  rates  and  not  to  piece  work  earnings, 
and  several  rulings  were  made  to  the  effect  that  piece  workers  could  receive  under  Supplement  No.  4 
only  a  guarantee  that  their  piece  work  earnings  would  not  fall  below  the  hourly  rate  established 
for  employees  under  Supplement  No.  4. 

"This  section  was  strenuously  objected  to  by  men  on  a  piece  work  basis  as  being  discrimina- 
tion against  this  class  of  employees,  and  after  several  unsuccessful  attempts  had  been  made  to 
change  the  attitude  of  the  U.  S.  Railroad  Administration  on  the  matter,  the  question  as  to  whether 
piece  work  ought  to  be  continued  or  abolished  under  the  circumstances  was  discussed  in  several 
system  Federation  meetings. 

"As  time  wore  on,  resentment  over  the  discrimination  became  more  pronounced  and  Acting 
President  Jewell  suggested  the  advisability  of  securing  a  referendum  vote  of  the  piece  workers 
as  to  whether  they  wished  to  have  the  piece  work  system  abolished. 

"The  first  move  in  this  direction  was  at  Altoona,  Pa.,  when  the  employees  of  that  system 
formed  their  System  Federation  in  July,  1918,  at  the  convention. 

"It  was  decided  to  poll  the  system  on  the  matter  of  continuing  piece  work. 

"On  other  roads  where  piece  work  was  in  effect,  the  employees  were  showing  strong  evidence 
of  dissatisfaction  and  being  advised  of  the  action  taken  by  the  Pennsylvania  employees,  soon 
followed  in  like  manner  to  poll  their  respective  systems,  during  the  months  of  August  and  Sep- 
tember, 1918.  Early  in  October  the  vote  was  completed  and  showed  a  large  majority  in  favor 
of  the  discontinuance  of  piece  work. 

"Notwithstanding  this,  every  effort  was  still  being  made  by  the  Railway  Employees'  Depart- 
ment to  bring  about  a  satisfactory  adjustment  of  this  matter  that  would  give  to  the  piece  worker 
the  same  measure  of  awards  as  given  to  the  hourly  worker. 

"A  considerable  exchange  of  correspondence  was  conducted  with  the  Railway  Administra- 
tion with  this  end  in  view.  We  quote  the  following  letters  and  telegrams  of  evidence  of  the  senti- 
ment that  obtained  and  were  used  as  further  determined  effort  in  this  direction: 

"Washington,  D.  C,  Oct.  2,  1918. 
"Director  General  of  Railroads, 
"I.  C.  C.  Bldg., 

"Washington,  D.  C. 
"Dear  Mr.  McAdoo: 

"Supplementing  my  letter  to  you  under  date  of  the  25th  ult,  calling  attention  to 
the  general  unrest  that  exists  with  the  members  of  all  shop  trades,  particularly  with 
the  men  who  have  been  working  piece  work,  due  to  the  fact  that  the  railway  officials  seem 
to  be  in  possession  of  information  other  than  what  has  been  given  out  in  the  form  of 
official  circulars  from  your  office,  and  are  denying  these  men  the  award  granted  by 
Supplement  No.  4  on  the  ground^that  the  piece  work  award  is  fulty  covered  by  General 
Order  No.  27. 

"We  quote  hereunder  a  telegram  just  received  from  Jacksonville,  Fla.,  which  expresses 
the  sentiment  of  the  members  *on  a  large  number  of  roads  where  the  piece  work  system 
is  in  effect,  and  the  railroads  official  seem  to  be  either  handling  the  same  through  a  mutual 
understanding  with  each  other,  or  by  instructions  from  your  office  of  which  we  have 
not  been  advised. 

Telegram 
"  'B.  M.  Jewell,  "  'Jacksonville,  Fla.,  Oct.  1,  1918. 

"  '505  A.  F.  of  L.  Bldg., 

"  'Washington,  D.  C. 
"  'Sentiment  among  four  hundred  piece  workers  on  Seaboard  that 
interpretations  we  have  asked  for  are  being  held  up  until  after  the  Liberty 
Loan  drive  ends,  then  unfavorable  decision  given,  this  will  greatly  curtail 
sales.  Wire  me  some  information  suggestion  at  once.  Men's  patience 
about  exhausted. 

"  '(Signed)  J.  S.  Wilds.' 

"We  sincerely  trust  that  you  will  appreciate  the  importance  of  promptly  giving  out 
the  information  and  interpretations  on  all  matters  which  have  been  passed  upon  by  the 
Board,  in  order  that  the  employees  will  have  a  general  understanding  on  all  questions 
under  contention. 

"Thanking  you  in  anticipation  of  giving  this  matter  your  early  and  favorable  con- 
sideration, 

"Yours  very  truly, 

"(Signed)  B.  M.  JEWELL,  Acting  President, 
"Railway  Employees'  Dept." 


"Washington,  D.  C,  Oct.  18,  1918 
"Mr.  W.  G.  McAdoo, 

"Director  General  of  Railroads, 

"Interstate  Commerce  Bldg.,  Washington,  D.  C. 
"Sir: 

"We,  the  undersigned  committee,  representing  the  piece  workers  on  the  railroads  of 
the  Southeast,  respectfully  petition  your  reconsideration  of  that  portion  of  Interpretation 
No.  3,  to  General  Order  No.  27,  under  Supplement  No.  4,  wherein  it  applies  to  the  increase 
for  piece  workers. 

"We  believe  that  we  realize  your  position  in  this  matter  and  feel  that  it  was  your 
intention  to  deal  fair  with  all  railroad  employees;  we  further  feel  that  after  hearing  the 
case  of  the  men  we  represent  you  will  agree  with  us  that  the  piece  workers  in  our  case  have 
not  received  a  fair  consideration. 

"We  notice  in  almost  all  your  awards,  that  you  have  given  at  least  13  cents  per  hour 
increase  above  the  rates  in  effect,  as  of  Dec.  31, 1917.  This  has  been  done  in  every  class  of 
skilled  labor  and  their  helpers;  it  has  also  been  done  for  the  colored  help,  but  for  the  piece 
workers,  many  of  them  will  not  receive  over  2]/^  cents  per  hour  increase  on  their  back  pay. 
"We  realize  that  some  of  the  piece  workers  in  the  past  have  earned  more  than  the 
hourly  rate  men,  but  we  feel  that  you  must  know  that  these  men  have  done  a  certain 
amount  of  work  to  earn  that  amount  and  that  their  earnings  are  an  absolute  guarantee 
that  they  did  that  amount  of  work. 

"The  day  workers  have  always  received  a  neat  sum  of  money  in  the  way  of  back 
pay  checks  and  the  piece  workers  have  been  led  to  believe  that  they  would  receive  the 
same  increases  per  hour  in  the  form  of  back  pay  that  the  hourly  workers  received,  in 
accordance  with  your  promise  in  General  Order  No.  27,  page  15,  which  states  as  follows: 
"  '(1)    The  piece  worker  shall  receive  for  each  hour  worked  the  same  in- 
crease per  hour  as  is  awarded  to  the  hourly  worker  engaged  in  similar  employ- 
ment in  the  same  shop.* 

"Many  piece  workers  have  bought  liberty  bonds  freely  on  the  strength  of  the  above 
promise,  with  the  result  that  they  now  have  debts  on  their  hands  that  will  be  hard  for 
them  to  meet,  if  they  do  not  receive  the  same  consideration  in  the  matter  of  back  pay 
as  the  hourly  rated  men. 

"We  hope  you  will  understand  our  position  clearly  and  bear  in  mind  that  we  fully 
realize  the  complications  arising  when  the  many  different  rates  and  systems  of  piece  work 
are  considered,  but  for  your  information,  we  wish  to  point  out  that  under  the  Interpre- 
tation No.  3,  to  General  Order  No.  27,  and  Supplement  No.  4,  many  of  the  piece  workers 
on  roads  with  a  low  hourly  rate  have  had  piece  work  rates  established  that  enabled  them 
to  earn  as  much  on  piece  work  as  the  piece  workers  on  other  roads  having  a  higher  hourly 
rate  and  will  receive  in  back  pay  as  much,  and  in  many  cases  more,  as  we  are  asking  for 
the  men  we  represent,  and  we  do  not  think  it  fair  that  some  piece  workers  should  receive 
a  large  increase  in  addition  to  their  earnings  in  back  pay,  while  other  piece  workers 
earning  the  same  amount  on  piece  work,  should  receive  practically  no  increases  just 
because  of  the  method  of  application. 

"We  claim  that  inasmuch  as  you  have  made  it  possible  for  all  classes  of  employees 
in  the  shop  crafts  to  receive  back  pay  since  January  1st,  at  the  rate  of  13  cents  per  hour, 
it  is  no  more  than  fair  to  ask  that  piece  workers  should  also  have  at  least  12  cents  per 
hour  back  pay  or  an  increase  of  13  cents  per  hour  above  their  earnings  as  of  December  31, 
1917.  And  as  stated  before  on  most  piece  work  roads  the  hourly  rate  for  such  employees 
was  very  low,  while  their  hourly  rates  being  increased  by  General  Order  No.  27,  to  the 
minimum  rates  established  therein  gives  such  employees  the  increase  we  are  asking  for, 
but  on  the  roads  we  represent,  while  the  piece  workers  did  not  earn  any  more  than  the 
piece  workers  on  the  roads  having  a  low  hourly  rate,  the  fact  that  our  hourly  rates  were 
much  higher,  will  deny  our  piece  workers  the  same  increase  that  the  piece  workers  on 
other  roads,  having  a  low  hourly  rate,  will  receive. 

"We  believe  that  it  was  your  intention  that  all  mechanics  of  the  shop  crafts  should 
receive  at  least  13  cents  per  hour  above  their  rate  of  December  31,  1917,  in  back  pay, 
and  we  hereby  request  that  you  again  consider  this  matter  and  give  to  the  piece  workers 
as  favorable  consideration  as  was  given  to  other  employees. 

'We  consider  that  the  same  increase  per  hour  awarded  the  hourly  workers,  above  the 
45  cent  minimum  established  for  Carmen — the  55  cent  minimum  established  for  other 
mechanics  and  the  33  cent  minimum  established  for  helpers,  which  was  12  cents  per 
hour,  should  be  added  to  the  earnings  of  piece  workers  in  addition  to  their  earnings  of 
December  31,  1917.     This  would  eliminate  many  differential  rates  that  will  still  exist 

10 


under  Interpretation.-No.  3,  to  General  Order  No.  27,  under  Supplement  No.  4,  and 
would  establish  a  standard  increase  whereby  the  back  pay  for  all  piece  workers  may  be 
figured. 

"The  piece  workers  in  the  southeast  are  a  highly  skilled  class  of  specialists,  and  while 
their  piece  work  earnings  may  compare  invariably  with  the  rate  of  the  hourly  workers 
and  perhaps  seem  fair  in  the  eyes  of  those  not  familiar  with  the  details  of  their  work, 
we  wish  to  say  it  is  only  the  years'  of  experience  and  expert  training  that  enables  these 
men,  most  of  whom  are  on  specialized  operations,  to  earn  their  present  compensation, 
while  the  average  mechanic,  not  specialized  on  such  work,  could  not  begin  to  turn  out 
the  same  amount  of  work  in  the  same  time. 

"These  men  have  had  many  invitations  to  change  to  higher  paying  positions  in  other 
industries,  but  have  remained  on  the  railroads  with  the  expectation  of  receiving  the 
same  consideration  in  back  pay  that  was  conceded  to  the  hourly  workers.  But  if  these 
men  cannot  get  a  reconsideration  of  this  interpretation  and  they  are  forced  to  accept 
other  offers  of  employment,  we  know  that  the  railroads  are  going  to  suffer  a  material 
loss  this  winter,  which  we  feel  can  be  avoided. 

"Again  requesting  your  earnest  personal  consideration  of  this  matter  and  a  speedy 
reply,  we  are, 

"Respectfully  yours, 

"(Signed)      H.  M.  Fallon,  105  Brady  St.,  Savannah,  Ga. 

"P.  D.  Laudemann,  426  MacBain  Building,  Roanoke,  Va. 
"B.  H.  Congleton,  116  Dinwiddle  St.,  Portsmouth,  Va. 
"R.  E.  Falligant,  71  Sweat  St.,  Waycross,  Ga." 

"Address  reply  to  P.  D.  Laudemann,  426  MacBain  Building,  Roanoke,  Va." 


"On  November  4th,  Acting  President  Jewell  followed  up  this  letter  to  Director 
General  McAdoo,  with  a  letter  pointing  out  that  the  piece  workers  had  been  unfairly 
dealt  with  and  pointing  out  that  due  to  this,  many  piece  workers  would  refuse  to  continue 
the  system  after  a  given  date  and  formally  asked  that  the  piece  work  system  be  abolished." 

"507  A.  P.  of  L.  Bldg.,  Washington,  D.  C.,  Nov.  4,  1918 

"Hon.  Wm.  G.  McAdoo, 

"Director  General  of  Railroads, 
"I.  C.  C.  Building,  City. 

"Dear  Mr.  McAdoo: 

"Por  the  past  several  weeks,  especially  since  the  issuance  of  Interpretation  No.  3 
to  General  Order  No.  27,  which  was  the  first  positive  statement  made  setting  forth  the 
amount  of  increase  granted  to  the  men  employed  on  piece  work,  we  have  received  and 
are  still  receiving  many  protests  from  these  men,  all  being  united  in  their  contentions 
that  they  have  not  been  fairly  dealt  with  in  the  measure  of  increase  granted  in  Supplement 
No.  4;  we  wish  to  state  that  these  protests  have  not  been  inspired  by  any  action  on  our 
part,  but  represent  the  unanimous  sentiment  of  piece  workers  on  all  systems. 

"Their  contentions  are  based  upon  the  interpretation  of  Sec.  D  of  General  Order  No. 
27,  'Rates  of  Wages  of  Railroad  Employees  paid  upon  a  piece  work  basis',  which  is 
construed  to  mean  that  they  were  promised  the  same  increase  per  hour  above  their  actual 
earnings  as  granted  to  the  hourly  workers  engaged  upon  similar  work  in  the  same  shop. 

"While  many  of  the  protests  have  been  framed  in  the  most  positive  language,  demand- 
ing that  their  representatives  take  this  question  up  at  once  and  secure  for  them  the 
fulfillment  of  that  promise,  we  have  hesitated  in  this  matter  to  permit  of  an  expression 
from  all  sections,  the  delay  in  this  case  is  attributable  to  the  fact  that  these  men  were 
loth  to  believe  that  they  had  been  discriminated  against  to  this  extent,  and  still  have 
full  confidence  that  such  an  injustice  will  be  rectified. 

"Some  time  prior  to  the  issuance  of  Supplement  No.  4,  and  because  of  the  insistent 
demands  of  the  employees  that  steps  be  taken  to  eliminate  the  piece  work  system,  we 
started  a  canvass  of  the  employees  on  all  systems  for  the  purpose  of  securing  an  expression 
from  all  men  so  employed,  with  a  view  of  presenting  these  facts  before  you.  This  poll 
is  now  nearing  completion  and  we  are  in  possession  of  sufficient  data  to  state  that  fully 
98  per  cent  of  the  men  employed  upon  the  piece  work  basis  are  favorable  to  ^'.-^'ng  the 
same  entirely  abolished. 

11 


"The  feeling  against  a  continuance  of  the  piece  work  system  is  best  illustrated  by 
the  actions  on  the  employees  of  several  roads  who  have  taken  a  positive  stand  that  they 
will  discontinue  the  practice  on  and  after  a  stated  time,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that 
they  are  aware  that  we  are  doing  all  possible  to  hasten  the  presentation  of  our  appeal  to 
you  to  have  it  abolished.  Such  a  sentiment  may  develop  into  a  rather  serious  situation 
and  which  we  are  doing  our  utmost  to  avoid,  giving  in  each  instance  positive  instructions 
to  the  members  that  no  action  must  be  taken  which  contemplates  a  stoppage  of  work  or 
reduction  of  output. 

"The  piece  work  and  bonus  systems  in  effect  on  a  number  of  roads  have  in  all  cases 
been  inaugurated  against  the  protests  of  the  employees,  and  but  for  the  fact  that  they 
were  unable  to  get  rid  of  it  without  involving  a  general  strike,  action  on  the  matter  would 
not  have  been  long  deferred;  on  the  other  hand,  the  railroad  officials  have,  for  reasons 
best  known  to  themselves,  not  only  refused  to  discontinue  the  piece  work  and  bonus, 
but  have  sought  to  extend  the  practice  wherever  possible,  although  we  have  been  con- 
vinced that  the  practice  was  not  only  costly  to  the  railroads  but  demoralizing  to  the 
employees,  and  we  feel  assured  that  you  are  in  possession  of  sufficient  evidence  in  support 
of  this  contention. 

"In  view  of  the  fact  that  most  of  these  piece  workers  received  much  less  than  13 
cents  increase  over  and  above  their  hourly  earnings  in  December,  1917,  many  of  them 
receiving  no  increase  whatever,  and  the  further  fact  that  the  result  of  the  poll  taken  by 
these  employees  settles  without  any  question  of  doubt  that  they  earnestly  desire  to  have 
the  piece  work  and  bonus  systems  abolished,  we  are  directed  as  the  officers  of  the  Railway 
Employees'  Department  of  the  A.  F,  of  L.  to  appeal  to  you  on  behalf  of  the  employees 
affected  as  per  Supplement  No.  4  to  General  Order  No.  27  addendum  and  amendments 
thereto,  to  the  end  that  these  men  who  have  been  employed  on  the  piece  work  basis,  or 
are  now  so  employed,  be  granted  not  less  than  13  cents  increase  above  their  hourly  earn- 
ings as  shown  by  the  pay  roll  records  of  December,  1917,  this  increase  to  apply  on  each 
hour  worked  and  to  be  retroactive  to  January  1,  1918,  and  to  continue  in  force  until 
order  has  been  issued  by  you  abolishing  the  piece  work  and  bonus  systems. 

"We  are  convinced  that  a  compliance  with  this  request  will  meet  a  long  felt  want, 
and  contribute  immeasurably  towards  the  efficiency  of  the  service  and  in  securing  the 
hearty  support  and  co-operation  of  the  employees. 

"Hoping  that  this  matter  will  receive  your  early  and  favorable  consideration, 

'  "Yours  very  truly, 

"B.  M.  JEWELL, 

"Acting  President  Railway  Employees'  Department, 
"American  Federation  of  Labor. 


"Due  to  the  excitement  caused  by  the  termination  of  the  war  on  November  11th,  the 
matter  dragged  until  December  28th,  when  Acting  President  Jewell  again  wrote  a  strong 
letter  to  Director  General  McAdoo,  calling  his  attention  to  his  letter  of  November  4th. 
A  few  days  thereafter  the  following  order  was  issued  by  the  Director  General: 

TELEGRAM 

"Washington,  D.  C.,  Dec.  31,  1918 

"A.  H.  Smith,  Regional  Director,  Eastern  Region,  New  York,  N.  Y. 
"C.  H.  Markham,  Regional  Director,  Allegheny  Region,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 
"N.  D.  Maher,  Regional  Director,  Pocahontas  Region,  Roanoke,  Va. 
"B.  L.  Winchell,  Regional  Director,  Southern  Region,  Atlanta,  Ga. 
"Hale  Holden,  Regional  Director,  Central  Western  Region,  Chicago,  111. 
"R.  H.  Aishton,  Regional  Director,  Northwestern  Region,  Chicago,  111. 
"B.  F.  Bush,  Regional  Director,  Southwestern  Region,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

"Evidence  has  been  presented  to  me  that  the  shopmen  throughout  the  country  by 
a  very  large  majority  have  expressed  a  preference  to  be  paid  on  an  hourly  basis  as  provided 
in  Supplement  No.  4  to  General  Order  No.  27,  rather  than  the  piece  work  basis  which 
is  in  effect  on  many  railroads.  It  is  entirely  agreeable  to  the  railroad  administration 
for  the  hourly  basis,  which  it  has  established  as  reasonable,  to  be  adopted  when  a  sub- 
stantial majority  of  the  employees  so  desire. 

12 


"You  are  therefore  directed  to  discontinue  piece  work  system  on  any  road  in  your 
region  and  substitute  therefor  the  basis  of  payment  provided  in  Supplement  No.  4  to 
General  Order  No.  27,  whenever  a  substantial  majority  of  the  employees  desire  such  a 
change.  It  is  important  that  this  matter  be  handled  without  delay  or  hesitation  and 
with  a  sympathetic  purpose  to  carry  out  fully  the  spirit  of  these  instructions.  Please 
see  that  all  officials  concerned  are  properly  and  promptly  advised  so  that  they  may  act 
without  delay  as  the  occasions  arise. 

"W.  G.  McAdoo." 

"Quite  a  few  railroads  had  completed  their  canvass,  but  others  were  dragging  behind 
and  the  telegram  and  letter  of  instructions  were  sent  out  from  this  Department  on  January 
8,  1919,  in  Bulletin  No.  87,  notifying  all  delinquents  to  complete  their  canvass  and  submit 
their  votes  through  the  Department  to  the  United  States  Railroad  Administration.  This 
was  done  in  due  time  and  every  piece  work  road  complied  with  the  request,  returning 
not  only  a  substantial  majority  but  a  98  per  cent  vote  to  discontinue  piece  work;  in 
this  manner  piece  work  on  railroads  passed  into  history,  at  the  earnest  solicitation  and 
vote  of  men  who  had  been  engaged  on  the  piece  work  basis  on  their  several  roads  for  a 
number  of  years. 

"One  feature  should  not  be  overlooked  in  connection  with  this  matter,  and  that  is 
that  only  those  directly  involved  on  the  piece  work  basis  had  a  voice  in  the  matter  of  its 
discontinuance,  effectually  discounting  the  theory  that  men  employed  on  a  piece  work 
basis  preferred  it  to  a  satisfactory  hourly  rating." 


Our  purpose  in  reading  this  correspondence  into  the  record  is  to  show  that  there  was  not  very  much  the 
matter  with  piece-work  up  until  the  time  the  piece-workers  were  denied  any  recognition  in  the,  various 
wage  orders  which  were  issued  by  the  Railroad  Administration.  We  believe  it  shows  conclusively  that  if 
they  had  been  given  recognition  they  would  have  been  entirely  satisfied  to  go  along  as  piece-workers; 
that  the  influence  that  was  exerted  by  the  heads  of  the  organizations  to  turn  these  men  against  piece- 
work has  had  a  very  strong  and  wide  influence.  We  believe  also  that  with  proper  consideration  for  the 
reward  of  effort  at  this  time  that  the  men  would  be  more  than  satisfied  in  the  majority  of  cases  to  return 
to  the  piece-work  system. 


13 


DECISIONS  COVERING  RE-INSTATEMENT 

The  Chairman  asked  if  we  could  furnish  any  information  or  a  list  of  decisions  of  Railway  Board  or 
Adjustment  No.  2,  with  reference  to  the  reinstatement  of  employees. 

We  have  prepared  and  submit  herewith  a  list  showing  docket  numbers  which  contain  decisions 
rendered  by  Railway  Board  of  Adjustment  No.  2,  the  Divisions  of  Operation  and  Labor,  and  by  the  Director 
General,  covering  cases  of  reinstatement  of  employees. 

Owing  to  the  fact  that  there  are  69  different  dockets  involved,  we  will  not  attempt  to  read  them  into 
the  record,  but  the  list  which  follows  gives  reference  to  the  dockets  in  question. 

LIST  OF  DECISIONS  OF  RAILWAY  BOARD  OF  ADJUSTMENT  NO.  2, 

DIVISIONS  OF  OPERATION  AND  LABOR,  AND  THE  DIRECTOR 

GENERAL,  HAVING  REFERENCE  TO  REINSTATEMENT 

OF  EMPLOYEES,  AFFECTING  DISCIPLINE 

Divisions  of  Operation  and  Labor 

New  York  Central  R.  R.,  Decision  No.  26. 


X)ecision  No.  44. 


Director  General's 


Decision  No.  172. 


SE-10 

SE-810 

MR-381 

SE-808 

AL-424 

SE-827 

MY-510 

912 

AY-624 

963 

JY-644 

1017 

JY-654 

1029 

JY-665 

1061 

JY-685 

1062 

AG-699 

1063 

AG-728 

1072 

AG-743 

1085 

SE-752 

1103 

SE-782 

Railway  Board  of  Adjustment  No.  2 

1107  1378 

1119  1398 

1120  1459 
1136  1470 
1153  1550 
1189  1552 
1223  1560 
1235  1575 
1266  1611 
1268  1675 
1338  1680 
1350  1684 
1356  1722 


1781 
1808 
1809 
1811 
1812 
1813 
1924 
1929 
1934 
1946 
1959 
2027 
2039 


The  foregoing  list  includes  cases  without  regard  to  whether  the  claims  of  the  employees  were  sustained 
or  denied.  Due  to  the  course  pursued  during  the  Railroad  Administration  control,  however,  unless  cases 
were  completely  disposed  of  by  the  railroads  and  the  employees  affected,  they  had  to  be  submitted  as  con- 
troversies without  regard  to  their  merits.  This  produced  a  state  of  indifference  on  the  part  of  the  rep- 
resentatives of  the  employees  as  to  whether  the  cases  were  settled  or  not  and  necessitated  repeated  con- 
ferences with  the  local  committees  aild  general  committees  on  cases  which  ordinarily  would  never  have 
been  handled  beyond  the  local  officers  resulting  in  a  continuous  state  of  unrest  and  agitation  which  could 
have  no  other  effect  than  to  lessen  the  respect  of  the  employees  for  the  officials  and  weaken  the  competency 
of  the  official  in  his  ability  to  enforce  discipline. 

The  effect  upon  the  morale  of  the  organization  from  this  indifference  to  the  authority  of  the  local 
official  needs  no  elaboration. 

In  connection  with  this  matter  which  has  been  touched  upon  several  times — as  to  why  better  discipline 
wds  not  maintained,  we  would  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  Chicago,  Milwaukee  and  St.  Paul  Rail- 
road at  Milwaukee  introduced  a  special  pneumatic  riveter  and  one  of  their  foremen,  who  was  desirous  of 
securing  a  greater  output  by  the  use  of  this  tool,  was  attacked  on  December  9,  1920,  by  one  of  the  boiler- 
makers  and  severely  handled  by  practically  the  entire  force.  The  men  also  threatened  the  supervising 
officers  as  well  as  the  General  Superintendent  of  Motive  Power.  This,  together  with  some  of  the  decisions 
which  you  will  read  by  referring  to  the  above  list,  will  explain  perhaps  why  it  was  not  possible  to  maintain 
better  discipline  on  the  railroads  during  Federal  control. 


14 


METHOD  OF  PAY— OUTSmE  INDUSTRIES 

In  order  that  the  Board  may  have  some  idea  as  to  the  prevalence  with  which  piece  work  is  followed  in 
outside  analogous  industries  we  telegraphed  to  a  number  of  firms  to  develop  information  along  this  line. 
We  endeavored  to  select  in  all  cases  only  those  firms  which  made  repairs  to  cars  or  locomotives  and  not 
to  the  building  of  them.     From  the  replies  which  were  received,  the  following  statement  has  been  made: 

STATEMENT  SHOWING  FIRMS  WHO  ADVISE  THAT  THE  PIECE-WORK  BASIS  OF  PAY 
IS  IN  EFFECT  AT  THEIR  PLANTS  WHERE  CARS  AND  OR  LOCOMOTIVES  ARE 

REPAIRED 


NAME  OF  FIRM 


American  Steel  Foundries 

American  Car  &  Foundry  Co 

Buffalo  Steel  Car  Co 

Haskell  &  Barker  Car  Co 

Illinois  Car  Company 

Interstate  Car  Co 

Illinois  Car  &  Mfg.  Co 

Laconia  Car  Co 

Liberty  Car  &  Equipment  Co 

Lima  Locomotive  Works 

Merchants  Dispatch  Transit  Co 

Pressed  Steel  Car  Co 

Ryan  Car  Co 

Steel  Car  Co 

Streator  Car  Co 

American  Locomotive  Co 

Baldwin  Locomotive  Works 

Bettendorf  Co 

Cambria  Steel  Co 

Chicago  Steel  Car  Co 

Koppel  Industrial  Car  Equipment  Co, 

Middleton  Car  Co 

Midvale  Steel  Co 

Pullman  Co 

Standard  Steel  Car  Co 

Westinghouse  Air  Brake  Co 

Lenoir  Car  Works 

Ralston  Steel  Car  Co 


LOCATION 


Chicago,  111 

New  York  City 

Buffalo,  N.  Y 

Chicago,  111 

Urbana,  Ohio 

Indianapolis,  Ind.  . 

Hammond,  Ind 

Laconia,  N.  H 

Chicago,  111 

Lima,  Ohio 

E.  Rochester,  N.  Y 

New  York  City 

Chicago,  111 

Euclid,  Ohio.  .  .  .  .  . 

Chicago,  111 

New  York  City 

Philadelphia,  Pa 

Bettendorf,  Iowa.  . 

Johnstown,  Pa 

Harvey,  111 

Pittsburgh,  Pa 

Middleton,  Pa 

Philadelphia,  Pa. . . 
Pullman,  111 

Pittsburgh,  Pa 

New  York  City 

Lenoir,  Tenn 

Columbus,  Ohio . .  . 


REMARKS 


None. 

None. 

None. 

None. 

None. 

None. 

None. 

None. 

None. 

None. 

None. 

None. 

None. 

None. 

None, 
(a)  85%  to  90%. 
(a)  Practically  all. 
(a)  Almost  entirely, 
(a)  About  80%. 
(a)  As  far  as  possible, 
(a)  Almost  exclusively.  , 

(a)  Virtually  all. 

(a)  About  80%. 

(b)  90%  of  repair  work  at  Pullman 

Works  is  on  piece-work  basis, 
(a)  Practically  all. 
(a)  Predominates. 

With    minimum    hourly    wage 

guaranteed. 
With  guaranteed  minimum  50 
cents  per  hour,  maximum  75 
cents  per  hour. 
Average   earnings    about   20% 


(a)  Reply  does  not  indicate  how  the  balance  of  the  men  engaged  in  this  class  of  work  are  paid. 

(b)  At  the  operating  department  repair  shops,  of  which  there  are  five,  employees  are  paid  upon 

hourly  or  daily  basis.     Reply  does  not  indicate  how  the  remaining  10%  of  the  employees 
at  the  Pullman  works  are  paid. 


THE  FOLLOWING  FIRMS  ADVISE  THAT  BOTH  PIECE-WORK  AND  HOURLY  BASIS 
OF  PAY  IS  IN  EFFECT  AT  THEIR  PLANTS  WHERE  CARS  AND  OR  LOCOMO- 
TIVES ARE  REPAIRED 


NAME  OF  FIRM 

LOCATION 

REMARKS 

Davenport  Locomotive  Works 

Keith  Railway  Equipment  Co 

Manitowoc  Shipbuilding  Corp. 

Rome  Locomotive  &  Machine  Works. 

Davenport,  Iowa.  .  .  . 
Chicago,  111 

None. 

None. 

Manitowoc,  Wis 

Rome,  N.  Y 

Intend  eventually  to  put  all  opera- 
tions on  piece-work  basis. 
Employees  are  transferred  to  piece- 

work basis  as  fast  as  rates  can  be 
established. 

15 


THE  FOLLOWING  FIRMS  ADVISE  THAT  THE  HOURLY  BASIS  OF  PAY  IS  IN  EFFECT 
AT  THEIR  PLANTS  WHERE  CARS  AND  OR  LOCOMOTIVES  ARE  REPAIRED 


NAME  OF  FIRM 
Pittsburgh  Boiler  &  Machine  Co 

Pullman  Company 

Sctdlin  Steel  Co 

Southland  Steamship  Co , 

Woodward  Iron  Co 


LOCATION 
Pittsburgh,  Kan 

(5  Operating  Division 
repair  shops) 

St.  Louis,  Mo 

Savannah,  Ga 

Woodward,  Ala 


REMARKS 


Expect  to  go  on  piece-work  basis  as 
soon  as  volume  of  business  justi- 
fies. 

Employees  at  these  five  shops  are 

gaid  either  on  the  hourly  or  daily 
asis.  At  Pullman,  Works,  Pull- 
man, 111.,  however,  90%  of  em- 
ployees are  paid  on  piece-work 
basis. 

In  all  departments  except  car  and 
locomotive  departments,  piece- 
work basis  is  used.  Car  and  loco- 
motive departments  too  small  to 
establish  piece-work  rates. 

Negotiating  for  piece-work  basis, 
which  will,  undoubtedly  be 
placed  into  effect. 

Our  shop  too  small  to.  establish 
piece-work  basis. 


THE  FOLLOWING  FIRMS  ADVISE  THAT  THEY  DO  NOT  REPAIR  CARS  OR  LOCOMO- 
TIVES AND  GIVE  THE  INFORMATION  AS  SHOWN 


NAME  OF  FIJIM 

LOCATION 

REMARKS 

American  Brake  Shoe  &  Foundry  Co. 

Chicago,  111 

Pay  to  a  large  extent  on  piece-work 
basis.      Manufacture   shoes   and 
castings  only. 

Griffin  Wheel  Company 

Chicago,  111 

Pay  on  piece-work  basis.    Work  on 
new  wheels  only. 

Rail  Joint  Company 

New  York,  N.  Y 

Pay  both  on  hourly  and  piece-work 
basis.     Manufacture    joints    for 
rails. 

Railway  Steel  Spring  Co 

New  York,  N.  Y 

Pay  on  piece-work  basis. 

Pay  both  on  hourly  and  piece-work 
basis.       Furnish    apparatus    for 
lighting  cars. 

Safety  Car  Heating  &  Lighting  Co . . . 

NewYork,  N.  Y 

Standard  Steel  Works 

Philadelphia,  Pa 

Pay  on  piece-work  basis. 

Westinghouse  Air  Brake  Co 

NewYork,  N.  Y 

Piece-work  predominates. 

16 


CONSTRUCTION  PLACED  ON  RULES  NOS.  153  AND  154 

At  the  afternoon  session  of  Thursday,  the  13th — as  the  members  of  the  Board  will  recall — a  controversy- 
arose  over  the  construction  of  Rules  153  and  154  in  the  agreement  covering  the  shop  crafts  (pp.  848). 

We  had  stated  to  the  Board  that  the  carmen  had  insisted  upon  a  construction  of  these  rules  which  denied 
to  the  railroads  the  right  to  employ,  for  example,  experienced  and  skilled  carpenters  or  painters,  unless 
such  carpenters  or  painters  had  previously  had  experience  as  CAR  carpenters  or  CAR  painters;  and  we  had 
also  stated  that  it  was  the  understanding  of  the  managements  that  this  position  of  the  carmen  had  been 
sustained  in  a  letter  issued  by  Mr.  Frank  McManamy — which  letter  was  read  into  the  record  and  contained 
the  following: 

"*  *  *  applicants  for  employment  should  be  required  to  show  that  they  had  served  an 
apprenticeship  or  had  four  years'  practical  experience  in  any  or  all  of  the  work  enumerated  in 
Rule  154." 

The  correctness  of  our  statement  both  as  to  the  position  taken  by  the  carmen's  organization  in  this 
matter,  and  as  to  the  meaning  of  Mr.  McManamy's  letter  was  challenged  by  Mr.  Jewell,  who  held  that  — 

1st:  the  carmen's  organization  had  never  stood  for  a  construction  of  rules  153  and  154  that 
would  prevent  the  employment  of  experienced  painters — for  example — even  if  they  had  had 
no  experience  at  CAR  painting;  and 

2nd:  that  Mr.  McManamy's  letter  could  not  be  construed  as  interpreting  the  rule  to  prohibit 
the  employment  of  such  men. 

In  stating  to  the  Board  the  constructions  or  the  interpretations  placed  upon  the  various  rules  in  the 
National  Agreement,  we  have  only  given  interpretations  susceptible  of  conclusive  proof;  and  jn  conformity 
with  this  policy  we  now  desire  to  read  into  the  record,  copies  of  certain  correspondence  to  show — 

1st:  that  recognized  official  spokesmen  for  the  Carmen's  organization  and  for  the  Railway 
Employees  Department  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  have  insisted  on  a  construc- 
tion of  Rules  153  and  154  which  would  prohibit  the  employment  as  Carmen  of  skilled 
journeymen  painters  unless  these  men  had  served  an  apprenticeship  or  had  four  years' 
actual  experience  in  CAR  work;  and 

2nd:  that  in  support  of  this  construction  of  Rules  153  and  154  the  General  Vice-President  of  the 
Carmen's  organization  cited  the  very  letter  from  Mr.  Frank  McManamy  which  we  read 
into  the  record  of  January  13  and  which  letter  the  representatives  of  the  employees  con- 
tended did  not  prohibit  the  employment  of  men  as  carmen  who  had  not  had  actual  experience 
at  CAR  work. 

The  correspondence,  a  copy  of  which  we  are  about  to  read  into  the  record,  arose  out  of  the  following 
circumstances: 

The  Charlestown  &  Western  Carolina  Railway,  needing  car  painters,  had  employed  a  journeyman 
painter  who  had  served  his  painters'  apprenticeship  and  had  had  four  years'  experience  as  a  painter  outside 
of  railroad  work.  His  employment  was  protested  as  a  violation  of  Rule  153  of  the  National  Agreement 
with  the  Federated  Shop  Crafts.  The  question  was  taken  up  with  the  General  Chairman  of  Federation 
No.  60,  at  Augusta,  Georgia,  in  May,  1920,  and  he  expressed  the  view  that  the  employment  of  the  men 
in  question  was  permissible  under  Rule  No.  153.  But  in  this  position,  the  General  Chairman  was  later 
overruled  by  higher  authority  in  the  organizations,  and  in  reporting  this  fact  to  the  management,  he  furnished 
it  a  copy  of  his  letter  and  the  replies  thereto. 

His  letter  setting  out  the  issue  involved  and  giving  his  own  view  is  as  follows: 

"Dear  Sir  &  Brother: 

(Matter  in  question  Rule  153.) 
"Is  it    the  intent  of  Rule  153  that  the  following  mechanics  must  have  four  years'  practial 
experience  in  railroad  work  or  is  it  permisiable  to  hire  a  mechanic  with  four  years'  experience 
other  than  railroad  experience  the  following  mechanics  I  refer  to.  Coach  Carpenters,  Painters, 
Upholsters. 

"A  painter  made  application  for  job  who  had  four  years'  experience  but  had  no  railroad 
experience,  his  experience  was  outside  experience  and  has  served  a  apprentice  Ship  as  a  painter. 
Is  this  man  eligable  to  employment  in  acordance  with  Rule  153. 

"In  the  event  that  there  was  a  vacancye  in  either  of  the  above  departments  of  the  Car  depart- 
ment, and  a  man  makes  application  who  has  served  an  ^.pprentice  or  who  has  had  four  years  or  more 
experience  at  his  trade  on  other  than  railroad  work  is  it  permisable,  accordance  with  this  rule 
153  to  allow  this  man  to  go  to  work,  or  does  the  rule  require  that  he  must  have  all  railroad  experience 
at  his  trade. 

17 


"As  General  Chairman  I  was  asked  to  give  a  ruling  on  this  matter  and  expressed  my  opinion 
as  followes,  That  the  same  rule  should  apply  to  a  painter  as  applyes  to  a  Blacksmith,  Machinest, 
Boilermaker,  all  we  require  is  that  he  must  serve  an  apprentice  Ship  or  have  four  years  experience 
at  his  trade,  and  this  painter  should  be  aloud  to  go  to  work  as  painter  in  as  much  as  he  has  the 
required  amount  of  experience. 

"Would  apprecate  if  you  would  advise  me  on  this  matter  at  a  early  date  as  possible  as  we 
have  this  painter  held  up  waiting  your  reply. 

"Thanking  you  in  advance 

"Fraternaly  Yours, 
"(Signed)     R.  G.  Smith  General  Chairman,  Fed.  No.  60". 


Under  date  of  June  3,  1920,  the  General  Chairman  received  a  reply  from  the  General  Vice-President 
of  the  Brotherhood  of  Railway  Carmen,  reading  as  follows: 

Office  of  General  President 

BROTHERHOOD  RAILWAY  CARMEN 

of  America 

"Kansas  City,  Mo.,  June  3d,  1920. 
"Mr.  R.  G.  Smith, 

"Gen'l  Chairman,  Federation  No.  60, 
"345  Walker  St., 
"Augusta,  Ga. 
"Dear  Sir  and  Brother: — 

"Your  letter  of  May  28th  received  and  contents  noted. 

"In  reply  to  the  subject  matter  thereof  relative  to  hiring  coach  carpenters,  painters  and 
upholsterers  who  have  had  four  years'  experience  at  their  trade  but  not  four  years'  experience 
in  the  Car  Department,  will  say  that  we  have  numerous  decisions  rendered  by  Mr.  Frank 
McManamy,  Assistant  Director,  upon  Rule  153  of  the  National  Agreement  which  specifically 
states  that  men  must  have  served  an  apprenticeship  or  had  four  years'  practical  experience  in 
any  or  all  of  the  work  enumerated  in  Rule  154;  therefore,  your  ruling  as  expressed  in  your  opinion 
is  contrary  to  the  ruling  made  by  Mr.  Frank  McManamy,  Assistant  Director. 

"I  am  enclosing  copy  of  ruling  made  by  Mr.  McManamy  addressed  to  Mr.  C.  H.  Ewing, 
Federal  Manager,  Central  Railroad  of  New  Jersey,  for  your  information,  and  I  trust  that  arrange- 
ments will  be  made  to  comply  with  the  interpretations  made  on  Rule  153  of  the  National  Agree- 
ment: 

"With  best  wishes,  I  remain, 

"Yours  fraternally 

"(Signed)     Frank  Paquin, 

"General  Vice-President." 
«EP:MB 
"Enc." 


The  letter  from  Mr.  McManamy  enclosed  in  Vice-President  Paquin's  letter  to  General  Chairman 
Smith  is  as  follows : 

February  19,  1920. 
C  of  NJ-NA-153-3. 

"Mr.  C.  H.  Ewing,  Federal  Manager, 
"Central  Railroad  of  New  Jersey, 
"Philadelphia,  Pa. 
"Dear  Sir: — 

"Referring  to  your  letter  to  Mr.  W.  S.  Carter,  Director,  Division  of  Labor,  in  which  you 
submitted  among  others  a  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  application  of  Rule  153  of  the  National 
Agreement  will  advise  that  the  rule,  insofar  as  it  relates  to  the  question  raised  in  your  submission 
is  clear  as  written,  therefore,  it  is  not  deemed  necessary  to  interpret  the  rule. 

"Concerning  the  question  raised  in  your  submission  as  to  whether  or  not  it  is  permissible 
to  hire  a  carpenter  as  a  carman,  will  advise  that  applicants  for  employment  should  be  required 
to  show  they  had  served  an  apprenticeship  or  had  4  years'  practical  experience  in  any  or  all  of 
the  work  enumerated  in  Rule  154. 

''Yours  very  truly, 

"(Signed)     Frank  McManamy, 

"Assistant  Director." 

18 


A  further  letter  of  advice  to  General  Chairman  Smith  in  reply  to  his  inquiry  is  as  follows: 

RAILWAY  EMPLOYES  DEPARTMENT 

"Washington,  D.  C,  June  3,  1920. 

'  'Chas.  &  West  Carolina  R.  R. ' 
National  Agreement  Rule  153 
Employing   house   carpenters 
and  painters  as  carmen". 

"Mr,  R.  G.  Smith, 
"Augusta,  Ga. 

"Dear  Sir  and  Brother: 

"Replying  to  yours  of  May  28,  in  re.  above  subject. 

"Rule  153,  does  not  permit  the  employment  of  Carpenters  and  Painters,  as  Carmen,  who 
have  not  served  an  apprenticeship,  or  have  had  four  years'  experience  on  any  or  all  work  outlined 
in  Rule  154. 

"You  will  note  it  is  not  permissible  to  employ  painters  you  refer  to. 

"With  best  wishes,  I  am, 

"Fraternally  yours, 

"(Signed)     B.  M.  Jewell 

"President  Ry.  E.  Dept. 
"A.  F.  of  L." 
"No.  2. 


We  respectfully  submit  that  the  foregoing  correspondence  conclusively  sustains  our  statement  that  the 
Carmen  had  insistently  held  that  Rules  153  and  154  prohibited  the  employment  of  experienced  and  skilled 
carpenters  and  painters  for  car  repair  work,  unless  such  men  had  actually  had  experience  at  CAR  work; 
and  that  they  had  with  equal  insistence  held  that  this  construction  of  Rules  153  and  154  was  fully  sustained 
by  Mr.  McManamy's  letter. 

During  the  controversy  over  this  matter,  on  January  13th,  Mr.  Jewell  made  the  following  statement: 

"Mr.  Chairman,  for  the  record  only,  I  want  to  make  just  this  statement  in  connection  with 
the  case  that  Dr.  Neill  cites  as  to  his  painter.  Individual  committeemen  may  attempt  to  announce 
the  policy  of  an  organization,  and  individual  officers  may,  but  there  are  in  all  organizations  certain 
authorities  who  announce  and  define  the  policies  of  the  organizations.  And  the  case  as  to  the 
policy  of  the  Brotherhood  of  Railway  Carmen  as  to  their  understanding  of  Rules  163  and  154 — 
in  September,  the  28th,  in  the  City  of  Chicago,  the  proper  body  was  convened,  and  they  announced  . 
their  understanding  of  this  rule,  which  we  will  submit  for  the  record  later.  It  is  to  the  effect  that 
a  carpenter  can  be  employed  in  compliance  with  this  rule;  it  is  to  the  effect  that  a  painter  such 
as  would  not  have  had  previous  experience  in  painting  car  equipment  could  be  employed  as  a 
carman  under  this  rule." 

From  this  statement  of  Mr.  Jewell,  we  understood  that  the  Carmen's  organization  had  now,  officially 
taken  the  position  that  Rules  153  and  154  permitted  the  employment  of  experienced  carpenters,  and  painters, 
as  Carmen  even  though  they  had  had  no  previous  experience  at  CAR  work.  From  the  language  in  the  con- 
cluding part  of  the  statement  that  such  a  man  as  we  have  been  discussing  "could  be  employed  as  a  carman 
under  this  rule",  it  would  naturally  be  inferred  that  such  a  man  employed  "under  this  rule",  held  all  the 
rights  under  the  agreement  that  any  man  would  hold  who  had  been  employed  in  conformity  with  the  pro- 
visions of  the  agreement.  There  is  no  suggestion  that  such  men  could  be  employed  only  by  the  consent 
of  the  General  Chairman  on  eaich  individual  property;  an,d  that  when  employed  under  such  permission  they 
were  to  be  regarded  as  merely  temporary  employees  to  fill  a  gap ;  that  they  were  to  be  given  only  a  condi- 
tional seniority;  and  that  they  were  to  be  promptly  thrown  out  of  their  employment  whenever  carmen 
seeking  employment  came  along  and  made  application  for  their  places.  But  from  a  reading  of  the  official 
report  of  the  action  taken  by  the  General  Chairman  of  the  Carmen's  Organization  at  their  meeting  in 
Chicago,  beginning  September  28th,  1920,  the  above  fairly  describes  the  only  status  which  the  resolution 
of  General  Chairmen  permits  to  experienced  men,  whose  experience  has  NOT  been  on  CAR  work. 

10 


From  the  reading  of  this  official  report  of  the  resolutions  adopted  by  the  General  Chairmen,  we  can 
only  understand  that' they  reasserted  the  very  same  contention  that  General  Vice  President  Paquin  and 
Mr.  Jewell  had  set  out  in  their  letters  already  quoted,  and  that  they  were  still  insistent  that  Rules  153  and 
154  prohibited  the  employment  as  carmen  of  experienced  carpenters  and  painters — for  example — unless 
they  had  gained  their  experience  at  actual  CAR  work.  And  in  support  of  this  construction  of  these  rules, 
the  General  Chairmen,  in  their  resolution,  cite  a  letter  from  Mr.  McManamy,  the  text  of  which  is  identical 
with  the  text  of  the  McManamy  letter  which  was  read  into  the  record  on  January  13th. 

The  only  understanding  of  the  resolution  of  the  General  Chairmen  that  we  can  gather  from  reading 
it  is  that,  after  reasserting  the  position  taken  by  Mr.  Paquin  and  Mr.  Jewell,  on  Rules  153  and  154,  it  pro- 
vides that  in  the  event  that  experienced  carmen  are  not  available,  and  that  all  apprentices  and  helpers 
promotable  under  the  rules  have  been  used  up,  the  General  Chairman  on  any  individual  property  MAY 
agree  with  his  management  to  the  employment  as  carmen  of  experienced  men  who  have  gained  their  ex- 
perience outside  of  Railroad  service;  but  that  the  employment  of  such  men  is  temporary,  that  they  hold 
no  seniority  over  four  year  carmen  and  must  be  displaced  when  four  year  carmen  can  be  furnished. 

The  resolution,  therefore,  does  not  in  any  degree  change  the  construction  which  the  carmen  had  pre- 
viously put  upon  Rules  153  and  154.  It  merely  permits  a  General  Chairman — if  he  chooses  to  do  so — 
to  make  with  his  management,  a  special,  temporary,  agreement  which  for  the  time  being  waives  or  sus- 
pends what  the  carmen  contend  is  the  proper  application  of  the  rules  in  question. 

We  believe,  therefore,  that  this  resolution  of  the  General  Chairmen  merely  supports  our  earlier  state- 
ment that  the  Carmen  have  insisted  that  under  Rules  153  and  154  the  railroads  were  prohibited  from 
employing  as  Carmen,  experienced  craftsmen,  unless  such  men  had  had  four  years  experience  at  CAR  work. 

If  such  men  are  permitted  to  be  hired  in  accordance  with  the  resolution  of  the  General  Chairman, 
they  are  hired  only  conditionally  and  temporarily;  and  not  as  of  right  under  the  contract,  but  only  by 
temporary  waive  of  contract  by  a  General  Chairman. 


20 


STATEMENT  MADE  BY  PRESIDENT    B.   M.  JEWELL   OF    THE  RAILWAY  EMPLOYEES'   DEPARTMENT 
OF   THE   AMERICAN   FEDERATION   OF  LABOR   ON   BEHALF   OF  ITS  AFFILIATED   ORGAN- 
IZATIONS   AT    THE    HEARING    BEFORE    THE    UNITED   STATES   RAILROAD 
LABOR  BOARD,   JANUARY   10,    1921 

Judging  from  the  press  campaign,  the  railroads  are  about  to  ask  this  Board: 

1.  To  abrogate  the  National  Agreements  entirely,  or  in  large  part,  or  at  any  rate  in  respect  to  rules  deemed 
exceedingly  important  by  the  employees. 

2.  To  attempt  thereafter  to  secure  either  local,  system  or  regional  boards  of  adjustment  instead  of  a  single 
national  board  of  adjustment,  such  as  was  in  effect  during  the  period  of  Government  control,  and  as  is  desired 
by  the  employees  represented  by  the  Railway  Employees'  Department  and  its  affiliated  organizations. 

The  railroads  have  heralded  widely  their  accomplishments  since  Government  control  was  removed  and  their  need  for 
economy  and  their  desire  to  serve  their  stockholders  and  the  public.  They  have  requested  chambers  of  commerce  and 
other  business  organizations  to  appeal  to  this  Board  for  the  establishment  of  local  Boards  of  Adjustment.  They  have 
attempted  to  prejudice  the  whole  case  in  the  minds  of  the  public,  and  the  American  Railway  Executives  have  openly  stated 
in  Number  2,  Volume  I  of  their  weekly  paper  called  AMERICAN  RAILROADS,  that  they  have  access  to,  and  will  use 
for  the  purposes  of  giving  "information"  to  the  Public,  nearly  ten  thousand  papers,  including  nearly  two  thousand  daily 
newspapers,  over  seven  thousand  country  weeklies,  one  hundred  and  forty-nine  foreign  language  newspapers,  thirty-five 
farm  journals,  one  hundred  and  seventy-six  labor  papers,  forty-two  business  journals,  and  eleven  national  weeklies.  Prom- 
inent representatives  of  the  railroad  executives  have  said  that  they  wanted  to  get  close  to  the  employees  in  the  old  fashioned 
way  and  improve  the  morale  of  their  employees.  They  have  accused  the  railway  employees'  organizations  of  an  attempt 
to  establish  the  closed  union  shop  and  the  "one  big  union",  and  with  threatening  the  public  welfare. 

There  are  two  old  maxims  and  principles  recognized  for  hundreds  of  years  by  courts  of  equity,  that  "He  who  seeks 
equity  must  come  into  court  with  clean  hands",  and  that  "He  who  seeks  equity  should  first  do  equity". 

On  behalf  of  the  Railway  Employees'  Department  and  its  constituent  organizations,  we  charge  that  the  railroads  and 
those  who  control  them  have  not  done  equity  either  in  respect  to  the  public  interest,  or  in  respect  to  the  Government  under 
whose  authority  this  Board  was  created  and  is  now  acting,  or  in  respect  to  the  spirit  of  the  Transportation  Act,  1920  and 
the  public  purposes  this  Board  was  intended  to  serve,  or  in  respect  to  the  railroad  employees. 

We  charge,  and  later  on  will  substantiate  our  charges, 

1.  That  the  railroads  are  controlled  by  a  group  of  twelve  New  York  banks,  trust  companies  and  insurance 
companies,  dominated  by  J.  P.  Morgan  &  Co.,  and  that  a  group  of  only  twenty-five  men  are  the  instruments  of 
this  and  an  even  wider  control. 

2.  That  this  sarne  group  of  twelve  financial  institutions  at  the  same  time  has  interlocking  directors  with 
twenty  of  the  leading  railroad  equipment  companies. 

3.  That,  during  the  past  year,  the  railroads  have  sent  out  to  such  outside  railroad  equipment  companies  for 
repair  on  contract,  over  617  locomotives  and  over  29,000  freight  cars,  and  have  made  contracts  for  much  more 
repair  work  of  like  order. 

4.  That  the  charges  for  such  repairs  in  outside  shops  have  been  grossly  excessive,  averaging  $10,000  in  excess 
of  legitimate  costs  for  the  repair  of  each  locomotive,  and  approximately  $500  in  excess  of  legitimate  costs  for  the 
repair  of  each  freight  car,  and  that  these  unwarranted  profits  have  amounted  to  over  $25,000,000  during  the  past 
year,  and  if  allowed  to  go  on  at  the  present  rate,  may  amount  to  well  over  half  a  billion  dollars  a  year. 

5.  That  the  money  so  taken  from  the  railroads  is  still  subject  to  the  control  of  the  financial  interests  above  . 
mentioned  by  virtue  of  their  control  of  both  the  railroads  and  the  equipment  companies. 

6.  That  these  over-charges  constitute  a  drain  upon  the  treasury  of  the  United  States  Government  by  reason 
of  the  Government  guaranty  established  under  the  Transportation  Act,  1920. 

7.  That  the  close  control  of  both  railroads  and  equipment  companies  by  these  financial  interests  gives 
ground  for  grave  suspicion  of  a  conspiracy  to  defraud  the  Government  in  violation  of  Section  37  of  the  Act  of  March 
4th,  1909,  which  reads:  "If  two  or  more  persons  conspire  either  to  commit  any  offense  against  the  United  States 
or  to  defraud  the  United  States  in  any  manner  or  for  any  purpose,  and  one  or  more  of  such  parties  do  any  act  to 
effect  the  object  of  the  conspiracy,  each  of  the  parties  to  such  conspiracy  shall  be  fined  not  more  than  $10,000,  or 
imprisonment  not  more  than  2  years,  or  both",  and  in  violation  of  Section  35  of  said  Act,  as  amended  by  the 
Act  of  October  23,  1918,  which,  in  substance  makes  it  a  crime  to  present  any  false,  fictitious  or  fraudulent  claim 
against  the  United  States  Government  for  payment  by  it,  and  makes  it  a  crime  to  knowingly  and  wilfully  falsify 
or  conceal  or  cover  up  any  material  fact  in  order  to  obtain  the  payment  of  such  a  claim ;  and  if  such  a  conspiracy 
has  existed  it  renders  many  parties  guilty  by  reason  of  Section  332  of  said  Act  of  March  4,  1909,  which  states 
that:  "Whoever  directly  commits  any  act  constituting  an  offense  defined  in  any  law  of  the  United  States,  or 
aids,  abets,  counsels,  commands,  induces,  or  procures  its  commission,  is  a  principal." 

21 


8.  That  these  same  railroads  and  financial  interests  within  the  last  two  weeks  attempted  to  secure  in  Con- 
gress an  amendment  to  the  Clayton  Anti-Trust  Act,  which  would  have  made  a  large  portion  of  this  outside  contract 
repair  situation  lawful,  whereas,  Vnder  the  existing  statutes,  it  is  unlawful,  after  January  1,  1921,  for  any  railroad 
to  have  dealings  in  supplies  or  have  any  .contracts  for  construction  or  maintenance  of  any  kind  for  more  than 
$50,000  in  any  one  year  with  a  corporation,  firm  or  association  in  which  said  common  carrier  is  interested,  except 
upon  competitive  bidding  in  the  open  market;  but  this  attempt  to  amend  the  Clayton  Act  was  thwarted  by  the 
President's  veto  of  the  Amendment.  ' 

9.  Furthermore,  that  those  same  interests  are  now,  by  Senate  Bill  4576  introduced  by  Senator  Frelinghuysen 
about  December  8th,  1920,  attempting  again  in  effect  to  make  lawful  that  which  is  or  was  intended  to  be  made 
unlawful  by  Section  10  of  the  Clayton  Act. 

10.  That  since  May,  1920,  over  50,000  shop  employees  of  the  railroads,  and  many  operating  employees,  have 
been  laid  off  by  the  railroads  at  the  same  time  that  those  railroads  were  sending  cars  and  locomotives  out  for 
repair  in  outside  contract  shops,  on  the  pretext  that  the  men  in  the  railroad  shops  were  too  inefficient  or  disloyal 
to  get  the  work  done  as  fast  as  needed,  or  that  the  system  of  time  work,  established  by  the  National  Agreement, 
was  too  expensive,  and  that  the  cars  and  locomotives  were  therefore  being  sent  out  for  reasons  of  economy. 

11.  That  these  lay-offs  of  employees  have  created  grave  conditions  of  discontent  and  suffering  at  a  time  when 
there  was  much  strain  in  the  public  mind  and  the  public  welfare  required  the  best  possible  spirit  and  harmony 
and  confidence  in  the  mutual  relations  of  Capital  and  Labor.  ^ 

12.  That  this  unemployment  constitutes  a  menace  to  the  public  health,  as  admitted  in  a  recent  bulletin 
issued  by  the  Metropolitan  Life  Insurance  Company — itself  a  very  large  owner  of  railroad  stocks  and  on  whose 
Board  of  Directors  sit  many  leading  bankers,  many  of  them  associated  with  these  same  twelve  New  York  financial 
institutions. 

13.  That  this  action  of  the  railroads  in  farming  out  large  portions  of  their  car  and  locomotive  repair  work 
deprives  the  men  who  would  have  been  doing  such  work  in  the  railroad  shops  both  of  their  right  to  the  wages 
established  by  this  Board  and  whatever  working  conditions  and  rules  may  be  established  by  this  Board  or  by  any 
railroad  adjustment  board,  and  their  right  to  an  opportunity  to  have  their  grievances  heard  and  settled  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  terms  of  the  Transportation  Act. 

14.  That  the  managers  of  the  railroad  equipment  companies  are  endeavoring  to  prevent  trade  union  organi- 
zations of  their  employees  and  to  destroy  such  organization  as  now  exists. 

15.  That  this  is  only  one  part,  though  a  very  important  part,  of  the  so-called  "open  shop"  campaign  now  being 
waged  by  employers  all  over  the  country ;  and  that  the  railroad  managers  and  their  controlling  financial  institutions 
have  conspired  to  bring  about  this  situation  in  order  to  destroy  the  employees'  organizations,  and  at  the  same 
time  the  railroads  and  financial  interests  are  in  effect  asking  the  United  States  Government  and  the  general  public 
to  finance  this  campaign  against  the  Unions  to  the  amount  of  hundreds  of  millions  of  dollars  a  year  in  the  same 
manner  as  has  recently  been  disclosed  by  the  investigations  of  the  Lockwood  Committee  in  the  New  York  building 
situation  although  in  that  case  it  was  the  Morgan-Steel  group,  whereas  in  this  case  it  is  the  Morgan-Railroad 
group;  and  this  Morgan-Railroad  group  are  exerting  every  power  they  possess  to  prejudice  the  American  people 
against  us  and  keep  them  ignorant  of  the  true  issues  and  of  our  side  of  the  case. 

16.  That  the  interests  controlled  by  the  Morgan  Combine  are  utterly  unfit  to  administer  the  railroads  in 
the  people's  interest  by  reason  of  the  fact  that  the  Combine  is  interested  primarily  in  profits  rather  than  public 
service,  and  furthermore  will  use  the  railroads  largely  as  an  instrument  of  war  against  organized  labor,  in  order 
to  establish  the  "closed  shop" — closed  against  Union  workers — ,  and  th|e  resulting  inhuman  conditions  of  industrial 
autocracy. 

17.  That  the  Transportation  Act  has  created  an  agency — the  United  States  Railroad  Labor  Board — to  which 
the  employees  must  look  for  relief  from  their  grievances.  That  this  Transportation  Act  is  admittedly  a  piece 
of  experimental  legislation  and  the  employees  represented  by  the  Railway  Employees'  Department  and  its  affiliated 
organizations  did  not  favor  its  passage,  but  nevertheless  they  are  law-abiding  citizens  and  desire  to  observe  both 
the  letter  and  spirit  of  the  law  as  requested  by  this  Board  in  its  announcement  of  December  17th,  and  they  are 
willing  to  give  the  Act  a  fair  and  thorough  trial.  That  no  matter  what  legislation  exists,  the  employees  ask 
justice  and  the  maintenance  of  healthy,  adequate  American  standards  of  living  and  work.  That  the  employees 
represented  by  the  Railway  Employees'  Department  and  its  affiliated  organizations  still  have  undiminished 
faith  that  the  Government,  this  Board  and  the  American  public  will  deal  justly  with  them  when  fully  informed. 
But  if  this  Board  cannot  afford  prompt  and  adequate  relief  for  this  situation,  there  is  grave  danger  that  the 
employees  will  be  persuaded  out  of  their  bitter  experience,  that  the  Government  has  not  afforded  them  fair  and 
adequate  protection,  and  that  the  public  does  not  especially  care.  If  the  faith  of  the  employees  in  the  United 
States  Government  or  in  the  attentive  interest  and  willingness  of  the  American  people  to  inquire  into  the  true 
facts  of  this  situation  and  to  render  them  fair  treatment — if  this  faith  be  lessened  by  ever  so  little,  the  service 
rendered  the  public  will  inevitably  suffer. 

22 


18.  By  reason  of  the  foregoing  facts  we  charge  the  railroads  and  their  controlling  financial  institutions  with  an 
insidious  attack  upon  the  public  terasury  and  upon  the  welfare  of  the  American  people. 

19.  We  charge  that  the  railroads  and  their  controlling  financial  institutions  have  violated  the  Transporta- 
tion Act  inasmuch  as  they  have  not,  as  above  set  forth,  administered  their  trust  "honestly,  efficiently  and  econom- 
ically", and  furthermore  their  expenditures  for  maintenance  of  equipment  have  been  unreasonable  and  contrary 
to  the  provisions  of  Section  422,  sub-sections  2  and  3  of  the  Transportation  Act. 

20.  We  charge  the  railroads  and  their  controlling  financial  institutions  with  a  conspiracy  to  destroy,  and  there- 
fore to  violate,  the  National  Agreements  by  means  other  than  a  public  hearing  and  decision  by  this  Board  as 
prescribed  in  its  Decision  No.  2,  and  that  they  have  further  violated  the  National  Agreements,  inasmuch  as  the 
above-mentioned  lay-offs  were  not  in  reality  made  in  order  to  reduce  expenses,  but  in  order  to  break  the  Unions 
and  the  spirit  of  the  men. 

21.  Since  this  Board,  in  Decision  No.  2,  expressly  stated  that  the  National  Agreements  were  to  continue 
in  force  until  the  determination  of  the  question  of  their  continuance  should  be  settled  by  this  Board,  we  charge 
the  railroads  with  a  violation  of  that  part  of  Decision  No.  2.  Also  certain  individual  carriers  have  flouted  this 
Board  and  publicly  announced  their  intention  to  reduce  wages,  in  violation  of  Decision  No.  2.  We  charge  the 
railroads,  in  coming  before  the  Board,  now,  with  an  attempt  to  secure  the  acquiescence  and  ratification  of  this 
Board  to  such  breaches  of  the  National  Agreements  and  of  Decision  No.  2. 

The  Transportation  Act  states  that  it  is  the  duty  of  this  Board  to  investigate  and  study  the  relations  between  the 
carriers  and  their  employees  and  "the  respective  privileges,  rights  and  duties  of  carriers  and  employees"  in  order  that 
"the  public  may  be  properly  informed." 

The  Act  further  provides  that  this  Board,  in  case  it  has  reason  to  believe  that  any  of  its  decisions  have  been  violated 
may  hold  hearings  and  determine  whether  such  violation  has  occurred  and  make  public  its  decision. 

We  assert  that,  in  view  of  the  foregoing,  the  railroads  had  car  and  locomotive  repair  work  which,  in  the  public  interest 
needed  to  be  done;  that  in  view  of  this  fact,  it  was  the  right  of  the  employees  of  these  roads,  to  have  the  opportunity  to 
render  this  public  service  and  at  the  same  time  earn  their  living;  and  that  the  railroads  owed  them  this  opportunity  to  work 
and  owed  to  the  public  the  results  of  such  work,  done  as  economically  as  possible. 

In  view  of  the  foregoing,  we  reiterate  our  charges  that  the  railroads  have  not  come  before  this  Board  with  clean  hands 
and  have  not  done  equity  to  the  general  public,  to  the  Government  or  to  the  railroad  employees. 

We  desire  to  point  out  that  if  the  railroads  are  to  be  permitted  thus  to  farm  out  their  locomotive  and  car  repair  work, 
and  thus  arbitrarily  deprive  the  employees  represented  by  the  Railway  Employees'  Department  and  its  affiliated  organi- 
zations, of  their  opportunity  to  work,  and  such  protection  as  is  afforded  by  the  Transportation  Act  and  by  decisions  of 
this  Board  thereunder,  then  the  railroads  may  likewise  farm  out  to  outside  private  contracting  companies  the  maintenance 
of  their  tracks  and  buildings  and  bridges,  and  possibly  even  other  departments  of  their  activities,  and  thereby  mulct  the 
American  people  still  further  and  deprive  the  Maintenance-of-Way  and  other  employees  of  similar  rights.  We  seriously 
question  whether,  under  the  principles  of  public  service  law,  the  carriers,  having  assumed  the  maintenance  of  their  equip- 
ment with  their  own  shop  facilities,  may  lawfully  abandon  such  obligation  without  clear  proof  determined  by  public  hearing 
before  lawfully  constituted  bodies  that  such  actions  are  in  the  interests  of  the  public  welfare  both  financially  and  in  relation 
to  the  labor  problems  thereby  created. 

The  Railway  Employees'  Department  and  its  affiliated  organizations,  by  virtue  of  the  provisions  of  the  Transporta- 
tion Act  and  the  foregoing  matters,  request  this  Board  that  before  holding  hearings  on  the  National  Agreements,  it  investi- 
gate the  above  recited  situation  of  unemployment,  its  causes  and  all  circumstances,  both  those  set  forth  above  and  any 
others  that  may  later  be  brought  out,  and  give  full  publicity  to  its  findings  so  that  "the  public  may  be  properly  informed". 
And  that  it  investigate  and  determine  whether  the  railroads  and  their  controlling  interests  have  done  equity  to  the  employees 
and  the  public  interest  in  this  situation  and  whether  the  railroads  and  their  controlling  interests  have  come  before  this  Board 
with  clean  hands,  so  as  to  afford  them  a  standing  before  this  Board  in  respect  to  their  presumed  requests  to  have  the  Na- 
tional Agreements  abrogated;  and  if  the  Board  finds  that  the  Railroads  have  not  done  equity  and  do  not  come  before  it 
with  clean  hands  that  it  require  them  to  correct  this  situation  before  hearings  are  begun  on  the  National  Agreements, 
and  that  meantime  it  order  the  complete  and  careful  observance  of  all  the  rules  of  the  National  Agreements.  We  also 
request  that  the  Board  take  prompt  and  effective  action  to  relieve  the  existing  unemployment  so  created,  and  afford  pro- 
tection to  the  employees  in  respect  to  their  security  of  livelihood,  consequent  standard  of  living  and  freedom  to  join,  remain 
in  and  act  effectively  through  the  several  labor  organizations  which  they  have  created.  And  if  the  Board  should  believe 
that  certain  of  the  points  involved  in  this  matter  lie  more  fully  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission than  within  the  jurisdiction  of  this  Board,  we  then  petition  this  Board  to  request  the  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission to  hold  public  hearings  on  such  points,  and  that  then  this  Board  consider  the  findings  of  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission  on  such  matters  as  to  their  bearing  on  its  own  decision  on  the  situation. 

Because  of  the  dangers  created  by  the  above  facts  we  also  request  the  Board  to  take  jurisdiction  over  the  companies 
building  or  repairing  railroad  equipment. 

23 


And  if  the  Board  should  decide  that  it  has  no  power  to  take  effective  action  in  this  matter  for  the  relief  of  the  em- 
ployees, or  that  it  has  no  jurisdiction  over  such  companies  building  or  repairing  railroad  equipment,  we  desire  to  point  out 
the  great  injustice  of  this  situation  and  we  petition  the  Board  to  request  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  to  forbid 
the  farming  out  of  railroad  equipment  repair  work  to  such  outside  companies  even  more  rigidly  than  it  is  now  forbidden 
by  Section  10  of  the  Clayton  Act,  for  the  protection  of  both  the  railroad  employees  and  of  the  American  public. 

Our  substantiation  of  the  foregoing  charges  and  our  discussion  of  the  National  Agreement  and  of  the  necessity  for 
its  continuance  we  will  take  up  after  the  railroads  have  made  their  presentation. 

No  conferences  have  been  held  between  the  duly  authorized  committee  of  the  Railway  Employees'  Department  of 
the  American  Federation  of  Labor  and  the  committee  representing  Railroad  Managements  of  which  Mr.  E.  T.  Whiter  is 
Chairman,  at  which  we  were  advised  as  to  the  desire  of  the  Management  to  amend  specific  rules,  and  we  do  not  know 
what  will  be  the  presentation  of  Mr.  Whiter  and  his  committee.  Therefore,  until  such  time  as  Mr.  Whiter  and  his 
committee  have  presented  to  the  Board  their  views  and  we  have  an  opportunity  to  review  same  and  prepare  replies, 
the  Railway  Employees  Department,  in  behalf  of  the  employees  whom  it  represents,  may  be  understood  as  resting 
their  case  with  the  Board  with  the  understanding  that  after  management  has  presented  its  case,  y/e  will  then  have  an 
opportunity  to  present  further  arguments. 

Presented  on  behalf  of 

(Signed)  J.  F.  ANDERSON,  Vice-President,  (Signed)  JAS.  P.  NOONAN,  International  President, 

International  Association  of  Machinists.  International  Brotherhood  of  Electrical 

Workers. 

(Signed)  J.  A.  FRANKLIN,  International  President,  (Signed)  MARTIN  F.  RYAN,  General  President, 

International    Brotherhood    of    Boilermakers,  Brotherhood  Railway  Carmen  of  America, 

Iron  Ship  Builders  and  Helpers  of  America. 

(Signed)  EDW.  TEGTMEYER,  Vice-President,  (Signed)  E,  H.  FITZGERALD,  Grand  President, 

International     Brotherhood     of     Blacksniiths,  Brotherhood  of  Railway  &  Steamship  Clerks, 

Drop  Forgers  &  Helpers  of  America.  Freight  Handlers,  Express  &  Station   Em- 

ployes. 

(Signed)  JAS.  M.  BURNS,  Representing  (Signed)  S.  E.  HEBERLING,  International  President, 

Amalgamated    Sheet    Metal    Workers'    Inter-  Switchmen's  Union  of  North  America, 

national  Alliance. 

Presented  by 

(Signed)  B.  M.  JEWELL,  President, 

Railway  Employees'  Department,  American  • 
Federation  of  Labor, 


24 


STATEMENT  MADE  BY  MR.  E.  T.  WHITER,  CHAIRMAN,  ASSOCIATION  OF  RAILWAY  EXECUTIVES,  CON- 
FERENCE COMMITTEE  OF  MANAGERS,  BEFORE  THE  UNITED  STATES  RAILROAD  LABOR  BOARD 
ON  MONDAY,  JANUARY  10,  1921,  IN  REPLY  TO  STATEMENT  MADE  BEFORE  THAT  BOARD 
ON  THE  SAME  DATE  BY  MR.  B.  M.  JEWELL,  PRESIDENT,  RAILWAY  EMPLOYEES' 
DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  AMERICAN  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR 

Before  starting  on  our  regular  opening  statement,  we  desire  to  make  a  preliminary  statement. 

The  statement  made  on  behalf  of  the  Labor  Organizations  this  morning  consists  of  a  series  of  general  charges  which 
their  spokesman  says  they  will  not  attempt  to  substantiate  at  this  time,  and  which  have  no  relevancy  whatever  to  the 
continuance  of  National  Agreements  or  any  other  questions  now  pending  before  the  Board. 

The  apparent  purpose  of  the  labor  leaders  in  introducing  such  a  statement  is  to  divert  public  attention  from  the  con- 
sideration of  the  matters  actually  in  controversy  and  under  consideration  by  the  Railroad  Labor  Board.  The  very  fact 
that  they  are  trying  in  this  manner  to  divert  public  attention  from  the  matters  actually  in  controversy  leads  to  the  con- 
clusion that  they  have  no  confidence  in  the  real  merits  of  their  case. 

To  us  it  is  a  matter  of  profound  regret  that,  in  a  hearing  so  important,  there  should  be  interjected  a  series  of  charges 
admittedly  unsubstantiated,  and  that  coupled  with  the  insidious  intimation  that  unless  this  Board  follow  a  course  satis- 
factory to  the  employees  "the  service  rendered  the  puolic  will  inevitably  suffer." 

But  the  statement  read  into  thececord  this  morning  will  not  divert  us  from  the  presentation,  in  an  orderly  manner, 
of  the  real  questions  long  pending  before  the  Board;   and  such  presentation  we  will  now  proceed  to  make. 


25 


STATEMENT  MADE  BY  GENERAL  W.  W.  ATTERBURY.  CHAIRMAN  OF  THE  LABOR  COMMITTEE 
OF  THE  ASSOCIATION  OF  RAILWAY  EXECUTIVES  TO  THE  UNITED  STATES  RAILROAD 
LABOR  BOARD  AT  HEARING  HELD  BEFORE  THAT  BOARD  ON  JANUARY  31,  1921 

I  have  come  under  a  strong  sense  of  duty  to  lay  before  you  an  acute  situation.  Unless  this  Board  takes  prompt  action 
many  of  the  railways  of  the  United  States  may  be  forced  into  insolvency. 

Many  railroads  are  not  now  earning,  and  with  present  operating  costs  and  traffic  have  no  prospect  of  earning,  even 
their  bare  operating  expenses,  leaving  them  without  any  net  return  and  unable  to  meet  their  fixed  charges. 

The  emergency  presented  can  be  met  either  by  an  advance  in  freight  and  passenger  rates,  or  by  a  reduction  in  operat- 
ing expenses. 

With  declining  prices  and  wages  in  industry  and  agriculture  the  country  demands  that  the  solvency  of  the  railroads 
must  be  assured  by  a  reduction  in  operating  expenses,  and  not  by  a  further  advance  of  rates. 

The  National  Agreements,  rules  and  working  conditions  forced  on  the  railroads  as  war  measures  cause  gross  waste 
and  inefficiency. 

I  estimate  that  the  elimination  of  this  waste  would  reduce  railway  operating  expenses  at  least  $300,000,000.00  per 
annum.  It  would  be  far  better  to  save  this  sum  by  restoring  conditions  of  efficient  and  economical  operation  than 
to  reduce  wages. 

We  believe  that  as  the  wages  of  railroad  employees  were  the  last  to  go  up,  they  should  also  be  the  last  to  come  down, 
but  we  do  insist  that  for  an  ample  wage,  an  honest  day's  work  shall  be  given. 

The  public  has  the  right  to  insist  that  this  must  be  obtained. 

The  public  has  also  the  right  to  expect  that  the  railway  executives,  with  the  co-operation  of  the  regulatory  bodies 
and  the  employees,  will  as  rapidly  as  possible  reduce  the  cost  of  railway  operation  so  as  to  eventually  insure  a  reduction 
in  rates.  Ultimately  a  readjustment  of  basic  wages  will  be  required.  Meantime  it  is  to  the  interests  of  all  concerned, 
including  labor,  that  the  rules  and  working  conditions  shall  be  made  conducive  to  the  highest  efficiency  in  output  per  man. 

Mr.  Whiter  and  his  Committee  have  far  from  exhausted  their  evidence  on  this  subject  and  if  required  to,  will  of  course 
proceed.  But  it  will  be  dangerous  to  continue  the  consideration  of  these  agreements  rule  by  rule.  If  the  Board  follows  its 
present  procedure,  months  will  elapse  before  it  can  render  its  decision. 

The  urgent  financial  necessities  of  the  railroads  will  not  permit  them  to  wait  any  such  length  of  time  for  relief.  Long 
before  the  present  detailed  hearings  are  concluded  the  Board  will  be  flooded  by  appeals  from  individual  railroads  from 
all  parts  of  the  country  for  reductions  in  basic  wages.  It  will  be  impossible  for  the  Board  to  hear  and  dispose  of  these 
separate  cases  upon  their  merits  in  time  to  avoid  numerous  receiverships  and  the  possibility  of  a  National  panic. 

When  wages  have  been  too  low,  the  harm  done  has  been  offset  by  retroactive  increases.  Losses  of  railway  net  operating 
income  are  irreparable.     You  cannot  make  retroactive  tomorrow  the  savings  that  should  have  been  made  today. 

Your  Board  cannot  possibly  write  the  rules  and  working  conditions  of  every  railroad  in  this  country  and  adjust  them 
equitably  to  varying  geographical,  operating  and  social  conditions. 

It  rests  entirely  with  your  Board  to  determine  within  the  next  few  6,a,ys  whether  this  whole  situation  shall  drift  into 
chaos,  and  orderly  procedure  become  impossible  except  at  the  price  of  railroad  bankruptcy,  financial  shock  and  still  wider 
unemployment. 

The  Labor  Board  can  prevent  this  catastrophe  by  declaring  that  the  National  Agreements,  rules  and  working  con- 
ditions coming  over  from  the  war  period  are  terminated  at  once;  that  the  question  of  reasonable  and  economical  rules 
and  working  conditions  shall  be  remanded  to  negotiation  between  each  carrier  and  its  own  employees;  and  that  as  the 
basis  for  such  negotiations,  the  agreements,  rules  and  working  conditions  in  effect  on  each  railroad  as  of  December  31,  1917, 
shall  be  re-established. 

If  the  Board  will  do  this,  the  Labor  Committee  of  the  Association  of  Railway  Executives  will  urge  upon  every  railroad 
company  a  party  to  Decision  No.  2,  that  no  proposal  for  the  reduction  of  basic  wages  shall  be  made  within  the  next  succeed- 
ing 90  days.  This  will  afford  an  opportunity  to  gauge  the  economies  which  can  be  accomplished  through  more  efficient  rules 
and  working  conditions. 

It  also  will  afford  additional  time  in  which  to  realize  the  benefits  of  a  further  decline  in  the  cost  of  living. 

The  course  which  we  are  recommending  is  not  only  imperative  but  equitable. 

When  President  Wilson  issued  his  proclamation  on  December  26,  1917,  assuming  government  control  of  the  railroads. 


he  said: 


"Investors  in  railway  securities  may  rest  assured  that  their  rights  and  interests  will  be  as  scrupulously  looked 
after  as  they  would  be  by  the  directors  of  the  several  railway  systems." 


26 


In  his  address  to  Congress  on  January  4,  1918,  President  Wilson  said: 

"The  common  administration  will  be  carried  on  with  as  little  disturbance  of  the  present  operating  organiza- 
tions and  personnel  of  the  railways  as  possible," 

The  War  Labor  Board  declared  that  the  war  period  was  an  interrognum  to  be  used  by  neither  the  employer  or  the 
employee  for  the  purpose  of  bettering  or  impairing  the  position  of  either. 

To  perpetuate  as  the  normal  rules  and  working  conditions  on  the  railroads,  the  extraordinary  provisions  of  the  war 
period  is  a  distinct  violation  of  all  the  foregoing  promises.  The  war  has  now  been  over  more  than  two  years.  The  time 
has  come  when,  if  the  railways  are  to  be  efficiently  and  economically  operated,  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the 
Transportation  Act,  normal  conditions  of  employment  and  of  working  conditions  must  be  restored  and  increased  efficiency 
of  labor  be  secured. 

If  your  Board  adopts  the  foregoing  suggestion,  there  is  but  one  aspect  of  the  wage  question  on  which  we  ask  immediate 
action.  The  basic  rates  now  established  by  your  Board  for  unskilled  labor  are  from  39  to  483^  cents  per  hour.  Since 
your  decision  was  made  on  July  20,  1920,  these  rates  have  fallen  materially  throughout  the  United  States.  For  your 
Board  to  require  the  railroads  to  continue  to  pay  wages  to  unskilled  labor  far  in  excess  of  those  paid  by  other  industries 
is  unfair  to  those  industries,  and  bears  with  grave  injustice  upon  the  great  body  of  our  farmers.  Within  the  next  month 
or  six  weeks  practically  all  of  the  railways  of  the  country  must  recruit  their  unskilled  labor  forces.  It  is  desirable  that 
a  large  part  of  the  work  for  which  these  men  are  necessary  be  concentrated  in  periods  when  the  same  labor  is  not  needed 
in  harvesting  the  crops.  We  therefore  ask  the  immediate  permission  of  your  Board  to  pay  for  unskilled  labor  not  less 
than  the  prevailing  rate  of  wages  in  the  various  territories  served  by  any  carrier,  in  accordance  with  vSection  307  of  the 
Transportation  Act. 

I  regret  the  urgency  of  the  foregoing  presentation.  Its  informality  does  not  indicate  any  intention  on  the  part  of 
the  railway  companies  to  violate  the  principle  of  orderly  procedure  in  such  matters.  But  to  sit  by  and  see  this  situation 
develop  without  bringing  it  promptly  and  strongly  to  the  attention  of  this  Board  would  be  to  sacrifice  both  the  spirit  and 
thejletter  of  the  Transportation  Act, 

In  our  judgment,  unless  the  proposed  measures  be  taken  promptly  by  your  Board,  a  situation  will  shortly  develop 
in|which  orderly  procedure  will  become  entirely  impossible.  Your  Board  will  be  faced  with  the  gravest  responsibilities, 
which  it  could  not  possibly  successfully  perform,  in  a  condition  of  National  confusion,  if  not  of  chaos. 


27 


STATEMENT  MADE  BY  MR.  J.  G.  LUHRSEN,  PRESIDENT  OF  THE  AMERICAN  TRAIN  DIS- 
PATCHERS' ASSOCIATION,  BEFORE  THE  UNITED  STATES  RAILROAD  LABOR  BOARD 
AT  HEARING  HELD  BEFORE  THAT  BOARD  ON  JANUARY  31,  1921 

Mr,  Chairman  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Board: 

As  the  representative  of  the  American  Train  Dispatchers  Association,  I  want  to  enter  formal  protest  against  the 
Labor  Board  granting  the  request  made  by  General  W.  W.  Atterbury,  representing  the  Labor  Executive  Committee  of 
the  carriers. 

(1st).  Because  of  the  fact  that  the  Transportation  Act  will  be  violated  by  permitting  the  carriers  to  bring  before  this 
Board  mere  theories,  without  having  followed  the  requirements  of  the  law  governing  the  manner  of  bringing  matters  before 
the  Board,  and  bj'-  giving  these  theories  priority  consideration  as  against  the  dispute  now  properly  before  the  Board  and 
in  process  of  hearing,  and  which  has  taken  months  to  bring  before  the  Board  in  the  orderly  manner  prescribed  by  the  law 
as  set  forth  in  the  Transportation  Act, 

(2nd).  Because  the  carriers  have  already  presented  argument  which  without  proper  rebuttal  by  the  employees  can 
not  help  but  leave  an  impression  upon  this  Board  detrimental  to  the  case  of  the  employees, 

(3rd).  Because  the  statement  made  by  the  carriers  that  unless  immediate  action  is  taken  by  this  Board  in  line  with 
their  request  the  railroads  will  be  forced  into  national  bankruptcy  is  deceptive  and  fictitious. 

(4th).  Because  many  of  the  arguments  already  presented  by  the  carriers  to  the  effect  that  national  agreements 
are  forcing  the  carriers  to  compensate  employees  without  obtaining  from  them  effective  performance  cover  conditions 
forced  upon  the  employees  through  deceptive  and  inefficient  operation  which  the  employees  cAnnot  combat  nor  control, 
as  will  be  disclosed  by  the  continuation  of  the  present  hearings. 

^5th).  Because  close  analysis  of  the  operating  records  of  the  carriers,  and  particularly  train  sheets,  will  disclose 
operating  inefficiency  which,  if  rectified,  will  produce  a  saving  greatly  exceeding  the  waste  of  $300,000,000.00  alleged  by 
General  Atterbury  as  the  result  of  national  agreements. 

(6th).  Because,  prior  to  December  31,  1917,  train  dispatchers  had  no  agreements,  rules  or  working  conditions  except 
those  arbitrarily  imposed  by  their  superior  officers,  and  granting  of  the  request  of  the  carriers  will  mean,  in  respect  to 
train  dispatchers,  that  they  will  have  no  agreements,  rules  and  working  conditions  to  use  as  a  basis  for  conducting  negotia- 
tions. 

(7th).  Because  the  representations  of  the  carriers  that  they  desire  to  reopen  negotiations  concerning  agreements, 
rules  and  working  conditions  and  to  reach  agreements  with  their  own  employees  concerning  such  matters  are  false,  mis- 
leading and  wholly  without  merit,  in  support  of  which  we  charge  that  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad,  which  General  Atterbury 
directly  represents,  not  only  refused  during  Federal  control  to  comply  with  Railroad  Administration  instructions  with 
reference  to  treatment  of  dispatchers,  but  has  since  completely  ignored  all  requests  of  the  dispatchers  for  conferences 
through  which  might  be  obtained  mutually  satisfactory  understandings.  We  further  charge  that  General  Atterbury 's 
statement  "that  mutual  agreements  can  be  obtained  on  individual  railroads"  is  absolutely  false  insofar  as  the  train  dis- 
patchers are  concerned  upon  his  own  system. 

We  charge  that  if  this  Board  is  flooded  with  requests  by  individual  roads  for  immediate  reduction  in  wages,  as  pre- 
dicted or  threatened  by  General  Atterbury,  such  action  will  be  concerted  propaganda  tending  to  interfere  with  the  orderly 
procedure  of  this  Board  in  consideration  of  the  matter  now  properly  before  it,  and  the  individual  railroads  will  be  acting 
under  instructions  to  bring  into  existence  a  chaotic  condition.  "  . 


28 


STATEMENT  MADE  TO  THE  UNITED  STATES    RAILROAD  LABOR  BOARD  BY  MR.  E.  T.  WHITER, 
CHAIRMAN,    ASSOCIATION    OF    RAILWAY    EXECUTIVES,    CONFERENCE    COMMITTEE  OF 
MANAGERS  AT  HEARING  BEFORE  THAT  BOARD   ON  FEBRUARY  3,   1921 

General  W.  W.  Atterbury,  Vice-President,  Pennsylvania  Railroad  Company,  and  Chairman  of  the  Labor  Committee 
of  the  Association  of  Railway  Executives,  authorizes  the  following  statement: 

"When  I  went  before  the  United  States  Railroad  Labor  Board  on  Monday  morning,  January  31st,  there  was  an  emer- 
gency requiring  prompt  and  energetic  action  by  the  Board.     I  said: 

'Many  railroads  are  not  now  earning,  and  with  present  operating  costs  and  traffic,  have  no  prospect  of  earning 
even  their  bare  operating  expenses,  leaving  them  without  any  net  return  and  unable  to  meet  their  fixed  charges.' 

"Since  I  made  the  above  statement  I  have  been  advised  by  Mr.  Thomas  DeWitt  Cuyler,  Chairman  of  the  Associa- 
tion of  Railway  Executives,  of  the  result  of  a  canvass  of  the  operating  results  of  most  of  the  railways  of  the  country  for 
the  month  of  January.  It  is  understood,  of  course,  that  it  is  impossible  to  close  the  actual  accounts  so  soon  after  the  end 
of  the  month,  and  that  the  results  of  the  latter  part,  therefore,  have  to  be  estimated. 

"This  canvass  shows  that  thirty-six  railroads  estimate  that  they  failed  to  earn  even  their  operating  expenses  for  the 
month  of  January.  Among  these  roads  are:  The  Atlanta,  Birmingham  &  Atlantic  Railway;  Buffalo  &  Susquehanna 
Railroad;  Central  of  Georgia  Railway;  Detroit,  Toledo  &  Ironton  Railroad;  Erie  Railroad;  Great  Northern  Railway; 
Gulf  &  Ship  Island  Railroad;  Hocking  Valley  Railway;  Long  Island  Railroad;  MinneapoUs,  St.  Paul  &  Sault  Ste.  Marie 
Railway;  Maine  Central  Railroad;  New  York,  New  Haven  &  Hartofrd  Railroad;  Northern  Pacific  Railway;  Philadelphia 
&  Reading  Railway. 

"While  earning  their  operating  expenses,  twenty-eight  additional  roads  estimate  that  they  did  not  earn  their  taxes 
and  fixed  charges  during  the  month  of  January.  Among  these  are:  The  Arizona  Eastern  Railroad;  Atlantic  Coast  Line; 
Baltimore  &  Ohio  Railroad;  Boston  &  Maine  Railroad;  Chicago,  Indianapolis  &  Louisville  Railway;  Chicago,  Mil- 
waukee &  St.  Paul  Railway;  Chicago,  Rock  Island  &  Pacific  Railway;  Lehigh  Valley  Railroad;  Minneapolis  &  St.  Louis 
Railroad;  Missouri  Pacific  Railroad;  Norfolk  Southern  Railroad;  Pennsylvania  Railroad;  Pere  Marquette  Railway; 
Western  Maryland  Railway,  and  the  Wheeling  &  Lake  Erie  Railway. 

"Under  present  traffic  and  operating  conditions  these  were  the  results  despite  the  fact  that  the  sixty-four  companies 
referred  to — of  which  only  a  partial  list  is  given  above — have,  in  the  aggregate,  decreased  their  labor  cost  of  operation 
by  laying  off  approximately  200,000  employees  since  September  1,  1920. 

"These  companies  have  a  total  main  line  mileage  of  more  than  100,000  miles  and  constitute  approximately  40  per- 
cent of  the  railroad  mileage  of  the  country. 

"In  addition,  there  are  other  companies  of  well  established  earning  power  under  normal  conditions  which  expect  their 
earnings  for  January  to  exceed  their  fixed  charges  by  only  a  narrow  margin. 

"The  railroads  cannot  believe  that  the  United  States  Railroad  Labor  Board,  which  by  its  wage  decision  of  July  20, 
1920,  has  kept  these  National  agreements,  rules  and  working  conditions  in  existence  sirtce  September  1st,  can  or  will  deny 
to  the  railroads  and  to  the  public  the  relief  requested. 

"Included  in  the  above  figures  of  lay-offs  and  mileage  are  a  number  of  companies  which  I  have  not  specifically  men- 
tioned, which  in  previous  years  have  also  had  difficulty  in  approximating  a  fair  earning  power.  In  a  developing  country 
like  the  United  States  there  always  has  been  a  number  of  such  railways.  Their  economic  and  traffic  conditions  have  not 
justified  the  payment  of  trunk  line  wages  nor  the  observance  of  trunk  line  conditions  of  work,  even  when  these  have  been 
far  more  reasonable  and  less  costly  than  at  present.  Nevertheless,  the  augmentation  of  their  difficulty  only  goes  to  illustrate 
that  it  is  economically  unsound,  and  can  only  be  fraught  with  disaster,  to  attempt  to  compel  all  of  the  railroads  of  the 
country,  regardless  of  their  differing  conditions,   to  me§t  precisely  the  same  wages  and  the  same  working  arrangements. 

"Our  application  to  terminate  immediately  the  wartime  working  arrangements  which  do  apply  alike,  regardless  of 
these  differeing  conditions,  is  simply  the  attempt  to  secure  Government  sanction  for  the  necessary  process  whereby  these 
railroads  can  again  fit  their  expenses  and  operating  rules  to  the  conditions  of  the  territories  whose  public  servants  they  are. 

"All  the  suggestions  for  laying  this  matter  before  Congress  or  some  other  public  body,  with  the  implication  that  if 
not  so  dpne  the  condition  is  not  really  serious,  will,  I  am  sure,  mislead  no  one. 

"Congress  has  passed  the  Transportation  Act.  The  Interstate  Commerce  Commission,  pursuant  to  that  Act,  has 
fixed  rates.  Nevertheless,  the  railroads  cannot  achieve  their  earning  power  under  continuing  abnormal  and  inflated  operat- 
ing expenses,  of  which  the  labor  cost  is  the  principal  item.  Hence,  in  accordance  with  the  letter  and  spirit  of  the  Trans- 
portation Act,  the  railroads  are  before  the  on6  body  which  ought  to  grant  them  relief — namely,  the  United  States  Rail- 
road Labor  Board. 

"For,  as  I  said  on  Monday,  at  a  time  when  wages  and  prices  are  falling  in  the  field  of  agriculture  and  in  the  other 
industries  of  the  country,  the  public  has  a  right  to  demand  that  the  solvency  of  the  railroads  shall  be  assured  by  economy 
in  operation,  and  not  by  any  further  general  increase  in  rates. 

"The  fight  which  the  railroads  are  now  making  is  not  only  their  own  fight,  but  the  fight  of  the  farmer,  the  consumer, 
and  of  the  working  man  and  employer  in  every  industry  of  the  country." 

o 

29 


BROTHERHOOD  OF  RAILROAD  TRAINMEN, 
ORDER  OF  RAILWAY  CONDUCTORS, 
BROTHERHOOD  OF  LOCOMOTIVE  ENGINEERS, 
BROTHERHOOD  OF  LOCOMOTIVE  FIREMEN  AND  ENGINEMEN, 
SWITCHMEN'S  UNION  OF  NORTH  AMERICA. 

The  following  correspondence  in  connection  with  the  requests  of  the  above  listed  organizations  for  changes  in  rules 
and  working  conditions  is  shown  as  information  and  is  self-explanatory. 

(COPY) 

UNITED   STATES  RAILROAD  LABOR  BOARD 

Chicago,  Illinois,  December  18,  1920. 
Dear  Sir: 

This  Board  has  set  Monday,  January  10,  1921,  as  the  date  of  the  hearing  on  that  portion  of  the  dispute  between 
certain  carriers  and  your  organization  submitted  to  this  Board  on  April  15,  1920,  which  was  not  decided  in  Decision  No. 
2.     The  said  portion  of  that  dispute  relates  to  rules  and  working  conditions. 

The  Board  understands  that  your  organization  submitted  its  presentation  as  to  rules  and  working  conditions  as  a 
part  of  its  submission  on  said  dispute.  Inasmuch,  however,  as  several  months  have  elapsed  since  such  submission,  it  may 
be  that  your  organization  desires  to  supplement,  amend,  or  modify  the  submission  then  made.  If  so,  your  organization 
is  at  liberty  to  do  so  at  the  time  of  the  hearing,  January  10,  1921. 

In  order  that  an  arrangement  may  be  arrived  at  with  regard  to  the  order  as  between  the  several  organizations  and  the 
representatives  of  the  carriers  of  their  presentation  to  the  Board  of  this  matter,  it  is  suggested  that  you  confer  with  the 
chief  executives  of  the  other  organizations  parties  to  the  dispute  and  with  Mr.  E.  T.  Whiter,  the  representative  of  the  carriers 
parties  to  the  dispute.  It  is  requested  that  when  an  arrangement  as  to  procedure  is  agreed  to  that  you  advise  this  Board 
of  the  arrangement. 

A  copy  of  the  Board's  letter  of  this  date  to  Mr.  E.  T.  Whiter,  representative  of  the  carriers,  is  attached. 

Yours  very  truly, 

(Signed)  C.  P.  CARRITHERS, 
Secretary. 


The  foregoing  letter  was  sent  to  all  of  the  following  organizations  under  date  of  December  18,  1920. 

Mr.  B.  M.  Jewell,  President,  Mr.  J.  J.  Hynes,  President, 

Railway  Employees'  Dept.,  A.  F.  of  L.,  Sheet  Metal  Workers  Int.  Alliance, 

4750  Broadway,  Chicago,  111.  122  So.  Ashland  Bldg.,  Chicago,  111. 

Mr.  S.  E.  Heberling,  President,  Mr.  Timothy  Healy,  President, 

Switchmen's  Union  of  North  America,  Bro.  Stationary  Firemen  &  Oilers, 

39  North  Street,  Buffalo,  N.  Y.  .211  East  45th  Street,  New  York,  N.  Y. 

Mr.  M.  F.  Ryan,  President,  i\/r     t   /->    t    t,           r.      -j     ^ 

•Dn-ilJr-D-i/^                r  ^         •  ^^-  J-  ^-  Luhrscn,  President, 

Brotherhood  of  Railway  Carmen  of  Amenca,  .         •         n^     •     t\-       j.  -l.        a 

cno  XT  11  r)    -u-        xr            /^v      tv/t  American  Tram  Dispatchers  Assn., 

503  Hall  Building,  Kansas  City,  Mo.  300  ^^jj^^^  g^^^^  Chicago,  111. 

Mr.  W.  S   Carter,  President,  ^^  ^  j    ^^^.^^^  President, 

Brotherhood  of  L.  F.  &  E.,  /-v  j        r  t>    -i       j  'r  i           i_ 

nni  /-       A-       TJi^       /i       1     ^    nt,-  Order  of  Railroad  Telegraphers, 

901  Guardian  Bldg.,  Cleveland,  Ohio.  ,4^.          •  cx  x    t  t    -ou       o^    t      ■     -mt 

'                    '  Missouri  State  Life  Bldg.,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

Mr.  J.  A.  Franklin,  President, 

Int.  Bro.  of  Boilermakers,  Iron  Ship  Builders  &  ^^-  "^-  ^-  Johnston,  President, 

Helpers  of  America,  International  Association  of  Machinists, 

315  Wyandotte  Bldg.,  Kansas  City,  Mo.  Machinists  Bldg.,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Mr.  John  H.  Pruett,  Mr.  Jas.  P.  Noonan,  President, 

Masters,  Mates  &  Pilots  of  America,                              »  Int.  Bro.  of  Electrical  Workers, 

423-49th  St.,  Brooklyn,  New  York.  Machinists  Bldg.,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Mr.  W.  G.  Lee,  President,  Mr.  L.  E.  Sheppard,  President, 

Brotherhood  of  Railroad  Trainmen,  Order  of  Railway  Conductors, 

American  Trust  Bldg.,  Cleveland,  Ohio.  Masonic  Temple,  Cedar  Rapids,  Iowa. 

30 


Mr.  J.  W.  Kline,  President, 

Int.  Bro.  of  Blacksmiths,  Drop  Forgers  &  Helpers, 
608  So.  Dearborn  St.,  Chicago,  111. 

Mr.  E.  H.  Fitzgerald,  President, 

Bro.  of  Railway  &  S.  S.   Clerks,  Frt.   Handlers, 
Express  and  Station  Employees, 

Second  Nat.  Bank,  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 

Mr.  W.  S.  Stone,  President, 

Bro.  of  Locomotive  Engineers, 

B.  of  L.  E.  Bldg.,  Cleveland.  Ohio. 


Mr.  D.  W.  Halt,  President, 

Bro.  Railway  Signalmen  of  America, 

Machinists  Bldg.,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Mr.  E.  P.  Grable,  President, 

United  Bro.  Maintenance  of  Way  Employees, 
27  Putnam  Avenue,  Detroit,  Mich. 

Mr.  W.  V.  O'Neil,  President, 

Int.  Assoc,  of  R.  R.  Supervisors  of  Mechanics, 
100  Arcade  Bldg.,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 


(COPY) 
UNITED  STATES  RAILROAD  LABOR  BOARD 


Mr.  E.  T.  Whiter,  Chicago,  Illinois,  December  18,  1920. 

Asst.  to  Vice-President,  Pennsylvania  R.  R., 
Broad  Street  Station, 
Philadelphia,  Pa. 

Dear  Sir; 

This  Board  has  set  Monday,  January  10,  1921,  as  the  date  of  the  hearing  of  that  portion  of  the  dispute  between  the 
carriers  represented  by  you  and  the  organizations  of  railroad  employees,  submitted  to  this  Board  on  April  15,  1920,  which 
was  not  decided  in  Decision  No.  2.     The  said  portion  of  that  dispute  relates  to  rules  and  working  conditions. 

That  an  arrangement  may  be  arrived  at  in  regard  to  order  as  between  the  several  organizations,  of  their  presentation 
to  the  Board  of  this  matter,  and  with  regard  to  the  order  of  presentation  by  the  representatives  of  the  carriers,  it  is  sug- 
gested that  you  confer  with  the  chief  executives  of  the  said  organizations  of  employees  parties  to  the  dispute.  ^^Itjis  re- 
quested that  when  arrangement  as  to  procedure  is  agreed  to  that  you  advise  the  Board  of  the  arrangement. 

Copy  of  this  letter  has  been  transmitted  to  the  chief  executives  of  the  said  organizations. 

Yours  very  truly, 

(Signed)  C.  P.  CARRITHERS, 
13-031.  Secretary. 


(COPY) 


Room  1864  Transportation  Bldg. 
Chicago,  Illinois,  December  28,  1920. 


Mr.  C.  P.  Carrithers,  Secretary, 

United  States  Railroad  Labor  Board, 
Kesner  Building, 
Chicago,  Illinois. 

Dear  Sir: 

This  will  acknowledge  receipt  of  your  letter  of  December  18th,  which  advises  that  the  hearing  of  that  portion  of  the 
dispute  between  the  carriers  represented  by  the  Committee  of  which  I  am  Chairman  and  the  organizations  of  railway 
employees,  which  was  not  decided  in  Decision  No.  2,  has  been  set  for  hearing  on  Monday,  January  10th. 

In  your  letter  it  is  suggested  that  I  confer  with  the  Chief  Executives  of  the  several  organizations  of  employees,  parties 
to  the  dispute,  in  regard  to  order  as  between  the  several  organizations,  of  their  presentation  to  the  Board,  and  with  regard 
to  the  order  of  presentation  by  the  representatives  of  the  carriers.  Concerning  this  suggestion,  I  submit  that  in  regard 
to  order,  as  between  the  several  organizations,  of  their  presentation  to  the  Board,  this  should  be  left  to  the  organizations 
for  their  determination,  and  that  the  Committee  of  which  I  am  Chairman  should  use  its  judgment  and  discretion  as  to 
the  order  in  which  we  make  our  presentation  concerning  the  proposals  of  the  several  organizations.  Accordingly,  I  am 
sending  copy  hereof  to  the  several  Chief  Executives  of  said  organizations. 

Our  Committee  reconvenes  in  Chicago  on  January  4th,  1921,  at  which  time  I  will  take  up  with  the  Committee  the 
order  in  which  we  will  present  our  views  and  will  advise  you  of  the  conclusion  of  the  Committee. 

Yours    truly, 

(Signed)  E.  T.  WHITER, 
Chairman. 
Association  of  Railway  Executives, 
Conference  Committee  of  Managers. 
(Copy  of  this  letter  sent  to  persons  as  shown  on  list  next  attached.) 


31 


Mr.  B.  M.  Jewell,  President, 

Railway  Employees'  Dept.,  A.  F.  of  L., 
4750  Broadway,  Chicago,  111. 

Mr.  S.  E.  Heberlijig,  President,, 

Switchmen's  Union  of  North  America, 
39  North  Street,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Mr.  M.  F.  Ryan,  President, 

Brotherhood  of  Railway  Carmen  of  America, 
503  Hall  Building,  Kansas  City,  Mo. 

Mr.  W.  S.  Carter,  President, 
Brotherhood  of  L.  F.  &  E., 

901  Guardian  Bldg.,  Cleveland,  Ohio. 

Mr.  J.  A.  Franklin,  President, 

Int.  Bro.  of  Boilermakers,  Iron  Ship  Builders  & 
Helpers  of  America, 

315  Wyandotte  Bldg.,  Kansas  City,  Mo. 

Mr.  John  H.  Pruett, 

Masters,  Mates  &  Pilots  of  America, 
423-49th  St.,  Brooklyn,  New  York. 

Mr.  W.  G.  Lee,  President, 

Brotherhood  of  Railroad  Trainmen, 

American  Trust  Bldg.,  Cleveland,  Ohio. 

Mr.  J.  J.  Hynes,  President, 

Sheet  Metal  Workers  Int.  Alliance, 

122  So.  Ashland  Bldg.,  Chicago,  111. 

Mr.  Timothy  Healy,  President, 

Bro.  Stationary  Firemen  &  Oilers, 

211  East  45th  Street,  New  York,  N.  Y. 

Mr.  J.  G.  Luhrsen,  President, 

American  Train  Dispatchers  Assn., 
300  Mailers  Bldg.,  Chicago,  111. 


Mr.  E.  J.  Manion,  President, 

Order  of  Railroad  Telegraphers, 

Missouri  State  Life  Bldg.,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

Mr.  W.  R.  Johnston,  President, 

International  Association  of  Machinists, 
Machinists  Bldg.,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Mr.  Jas.  P.  Noonan,  President, 

Int.  Bro.  of  Electrical  Workers, 

Machinists  Bldg.,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Mr.  L.  E.  Sheppard,  President, 
Order  of  Railway  Conductors, 

Masonic  Temple,  Cedar  Rapids,  Iowa. 

Mr.  J.  W.  Kline,  President, 

Int.  Bro.  of  Blacksmiths,  Drop  Forgers  &  Helpers, 
608  So.  Dearborn  St.,  Chicago,  111. 

Mr.  E.  H.  Fitzgerald,  President, 

Bro.  of  Railway  &  S.  S.   Clerks,  Frt.  Handlers, 
E.xpress  and  Station  Employees, 

Second  Nat.  Bank,  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 

Mr.  W.  S.  Stone,  President, 

Bro.  of  Locomotive  Engineers, 
B.  of  L.  E.  Bldg., 
Cleveland,  Ohio. 

Mr.  D.  W.  Helt,  President, 

Bro.  Railway  Signalmen  of  America, 

Machinists  Bldg.,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Mr.  E.  P.  Grable,  President, 

United,  Bro.  Maintenance  of  Way  Employees, 
27  Putnam  Avenue,  Detroit,  Mich. 

■Mr.  W.  V.  O'Neil,  President, 

Int.  Assoc,  of  R.  R.  Supervisors  of  Mechanics, 
100  Arcade  Bldg.,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 


(COPY) 


Cleveland,  Ohio,  December  30,  1920. 


Mr.  E,  T.  Whiter,  Chairman, 

Association  of  Railway  Executives, 
Conference  Committee  of  Managers, 
Room  1864  Transportation  Building, 
Chicago,  Illinois. 

Dear  Sir: 

This  will  acknowledge  receipt  of  copy  of  your  letter  of  December  28th,  addressed  to  Mr,  C.  P.  Carrithers,  and  dealing 
with  the  hearings  that  are  to  begin  on  Monday,  January  10th. 

We  are  enclosing  you  copy  of  our  letter,  of  even  date,  to  Mr.  Carrithers,  on  the  same  subject,  for  your  information, 
and  that  you  may  know  the  position  we  take. 

Yours  very  truly, 

(Signed)  W.  S.  STONE, 

Grand  Chief  Engineer,  B.  of  L.  E. 


(Signed)  L.  E.  SHEPPARD, 
President,  O.  R.  C. 


(Signed)  W.  G.  LEE, 

President,  B.  of  R.  T. 
Enc. 
C/c  B.  M.  Jewell,  President, 

Railway  Employees  Dept.,  A.  F.  of  L. 
4750  Broadway,  Chicago,  Illinois. 


(Signed)  W.  S.  CARTER, 

President,  B.  of  L.  F.  &  E. 


32 


(COPY) 


Cleveland,  Ohio,  December  30,  1920. 
Mr.  C.  P.  Carrithers,  Secretary, 

United  States  Railroad  Labor  Board, 
Kesner  Building, 
Chicago,  Illinois. 

Dear  Sir: 

Referring  to  your  letter  of  December  18th,  wherein  you  notify  us  that  the  United  States  Railroad  Labor  Board  has 
set  Monday,  January  10th,  1921,  as  the  date  of  the  hearings  on  that  portion  of  the  dispute  between  certain  carriers  and  the 
transportation  organizations  submitted  to  the  Board  under  date  of  April  15,  1920,  which  was  not  decided  in  Decision  No.  2; 
the  said  portion  of  that  dispute  relating  to  rules  and  working  conditions. 

This  is  to  advise  that  the  Executives,  at  a  conference,  discussed  your  letter  and  also  the  copy  of  the  letter  written 
by  you  to  Mr.  E.  T.  Whiter,  Chairman,  Association  of  Railway  Executives,  Conference  Committee  of  Managers,  dated 
December  18,  1920. 

We  desire  to  call  your  attention  to  the  fact  that  these  rules  under  discussion,  for  the  transportation  organizations, 
were  submitted  to  the  Director  General  in  August,  1919.  Later  on  this  unsettled  question  was  delegated  to  the  bi-partisan 
Board  and  transferred  to  the  United  States  Railroad  Labor  Board. 

At  the  presentation  in  April,  the  rules  and  working  conditions  were  presented,  along  with  the  request  for  increase 
in  wages  and,  insofar  as  the  transportation  organizations  are  concerned,  their  presentation  of  the  case  is  closed,  unless  the 
representatives  of  the  railway  executives  present  additional  argument  that  will  call  for  rebuttal. 

It  is  our  further  understanding  that  the  Shop  Crafts  presented  no  rules.  We  think,  in  all  fairness,  that  the  Board 
should  pass  upon  the  rules  submitted  by  the  transportation  organizations  before  taking  up  the  question  of  rules  for  the 
Shop  Crafts. 

We  are  reliably  informed  that  the  railroads  intend  to  consume  some  six  weeks  in  presenting  their  side  of  the  case  on  the 
national  agreement  for  the  Shop  Crafts.  This  being  true,  it  would  seem  only  fair,  as  stated  above,  for  the  Board  to  pass 
upon  the  rules  that  have  already  been  submitted  by  the  transportation  organizations  before  taking  up  this  question  of 
rules  for  the  Shop  Crafts. 

We  are  very  anxious  to  get  the  agreements  for  the  different  railroads  signed  up  and  in  the  hands  of  our  men.  It  is 
impossible  to  do  this  until  the  Board  gives  its  decision  on  the  rules  and  working  conditions,  as  many  of  the  railroads  refuse 
to  sign  up  until  these  decisions  are  handed  down. 

The  transportation  organizations  presented  their  argument  first,  before  the  Shop  Crafts  were  heard,  and  in  our  opinion 
the  Board  should  not  require  them  to  wait  while  the  railroads  are  presenting  arguments  against  a  national  agreement  for  the 
Shop  Crafts  which,  as  stated,  will  consume  several  weeks  and,  perhaps,  months. 

We  do  not  agree  with  the  position  taken  by  Mr.  Whiter,  that  the  Committee  of  which  he  is  Chairman  "should  use  its 
judgment  and  discretion  as  to  the  ord  er  in  which  we  make  our  presentation  concerning  the  proposals  of  the  several  organiza- 
tions", and  we  ask  that  your  Board  order  the  presentations  to  be  made  in  the  order  in  which  they  were  made  by  the  execu- 
tives of  the  Labor  Organizations. 

A  copy  of  this  letter  is  being  furnished  Mr.  Whiter,  in  order  that  he  may  know  our  position  in  the  matter. 

Yours  very  truly. 


(Signed)  L.  E.  SHEPPARD, 
President,  O.  R.  C. 

(Signed)  W.  G.  LEE,       ' 
President,  B.  of  R.  T. 

C/c  E.  T.  Whiter,  Chairman, 

Association  of  Railway  Executives,    • 
Conference  Committee  of  Managers. 

C/c  B.  M.  Jewell,  President, 

Railway  Employees  Dept.,  A.  F.  of  L., 
4750  Broadway,  Chicago,  Illinois. 


(Signed)  W.  S.  STONE, 

Grand  Chief  Engineer,  B.  of  L.  E. 

(Signed)  W.  S.  CARTER, 

President,  B.  of  L.  F.  &  E. 


S3 


(COPY) 


Room  1864  Transportation  Bldg., 
Chicago,  Illinois,  January  5,  1921. 


Mr.  W.  S.  Stone,  President, 

Brotherhood  of  Locomotive  Engineers, 
B.  of  L.  E.  Bldg.,  Cleveland,  Ohio. 

Mr.  W.  S.  Carter,  President, 

Brotherhood  of  Locomotive  Firemen  &  Enginemen, 
901  Guardian  Bldg.,  Cleveland,  Ohio. 

Mr.  L.  E.  Sheppard,  President, 
Order  of  Railway  Conductors, 

Masonic  Temple,  Cedar  Rapids,  Iowa. 

Mr.  W.  G.  Lee,  President, 

Brotherhood  of  Railroad  Trainmen, 

American  Trust  Bldg.,  Cleveland,  Ohio. 

Gentlemen: 

I  have  your  letter  of  December  30,  1920,  with  reference  to  the  hearings  before  the  United  States  Railroad  Labor  Board, 
set  for  hearing  on  Monday,  January  10. 

For  your  information  and  to  advise  you  of  the  position  of  our  Committee,  I  am  enclosing  you  copies  of  two  letters  of 
even  date  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Labor  Board. 

Yours  truly, 

(Signed)  E.  T.  WHITER, 
End.  Chairman. 


(COPY) 


Room   1864  Transportation  Bldg., 
Chicago,  Illinois,  January  5,  1921, 


Mr.  C.  P.  Carrithers,  Secretary, 

U.  S.  Railroad  Labor  Board,  • 

Kesner  Building, 
Chicago,  Illinois. 

Dear  Sir: 

Referring  to  letter  to  you  under  date  of  December  30,  1920,  from  Chief  Executives  Stone,  Carter,  Sheppard  and  Lee 
(of  which  letter  copy  was  sent  me  by  the  four  Chief  Executives)  and  particularly  to  the  fourth  paragraph  of  the  letter, 
which  reads: 

"At  the  presentation  in  April,  the  rules  and  working  conditions  were  presented,  along  with  the  request  for 
increase  in  wages  and,  insofar  as  the  transportation  organizations  are  concerned,  their  presentation  of  the  case 
is  closed,  unless  the  representatives  of  the  railway  executives  present  additional  argument  that  will  call  for 
rebuttal." 

Upon  examination  of  the  record  of  our  presentation  heretofore  made  in  response  to  the  requests  of  the  four  Trans- 
portation Organizations,  we  find  that  our  position  has  been  clearly  stated  and  the  arguments  supporting  our  position  have 
been  fully  presented.  Therefore,  insofar  as  the  specific  requests  made  by  the  four  Transportation  Organizations  are  con- 
cerned, the  presentation  of  the  case  by  our  Committee  is  closed. 


tf 


Attached  hereto,  for  convenient  reference,  are  indexes  to  the  pages  of  the  proceedings  \n^erein  our  presentation  is 
et  forth. 


In  connection  with  this  formal  closing  of  their  respective  presentations  by  the  four  Transportation  Organizations  and 
by  this  Committee,  we  direct  attention  to  the  fact  that  Decision  No.  2,  by  providing  monthly  increases  equal  to  thirty 
times  the  increase  granted  per  day,  has  disposed  of  the  request  of  the  Conductors  and  Trainmen  in  passenger  service  to 
change  the  long  established  calendar  month  basis  to  a  twenty-six  working  day  basis. 

Yoturs  very  truly, 

(Signed)  E.  T.  WHITER, 
Chairman. 
Association  of  Railway  Executives, 
Conference  Committee  of  Managers. 


34 


(COPY) 

Index  to  presentation  made  by  the  Association  of  Railway  Executives  Conference  Committee  of  Managers  before  the 
United  States  Railroad  Labor  Board  in  response  to  the  requests  of  the  four  Transportaion  Organizations. 

BROTHERHOOD  OF  RAILROAD ' TRAINMEN 


Article 
Number 

COVERING 

Pages  of 
Proceedings 

1 

26-Day  Guarantee — Passenger  Service 

/  2151  and 
\  2228    to 

[2152 

2239 

2 

Basic  Day — Passenger  Service 

2239 

to 

2241 

3 

Overtime — Passenger  Service 

2241 

to 

2253 

4 

Guarantees — Passenger  Service 

2253 

to 

2260 

5 

Mountain  Differentials — Freight  Service 

/  2260  and 
\  2285   to 

2261 

2312 

•    7 

Guarantees — Freight  Service ■ 

2316 

to 

2357 

8 

Held  Away  from  Home  Terminal 

2357 

to 

2360 

9 

Monthly,  Daily  or  Trip  Basis 

2360 

to 

2367 

10 

Arbitraries  and  Special  Allowances 

2369 

to 

2372 

11 

Beginning  and  Ending  of  Day 

2372 

to 

2374 

12 

Deadheading 

2374 

to 

2382-A 

13 

Right  to  Legislate  for  Yardmasters 

2398 

to 

2401 

15 

Overtime — Yard  Service 

2402 

to 

2403 

16 

Guarantees — Yard  Service 

2403 

to 

2411 

17 

Assignments — Yard  Service 

2411 

to 

2424 

19 

Point  for  Beginning  and  Ending  of  Day — Yard  Service 

2424 

to 

2428 

20 

Lunch — Yard  Service 

2428 

to 

2439 

21 

Overtime — Sundays  and  Holidays — Yard  Service 

2439 

to 

2450 

22 

Application  of  Proposed  Rules  to  Existing  Agreements,  etc 

2450 

to 

2456 

Sur-rebuttal 

3278 

to 

3305 

35 


ORDER  OF  RAILWAY  CONDUCTORS 

The  Order  of  Railway  Conductors  presented  the  following  request  for  working  rules: 

"Working  Rules:  The  rules  for  all  men  on  the  train  should  be  uniform,  and  they  should  have  the  same 
working  conditions.  Specific  requests  filed  by  other  organizations  in  this  regard  are  satisfactory  to  the 
conductors." 

Our  comments  in  connection  with  the  rules  contained  in  the  Trainmen's  request  apply  equally  to  the  Conductors. 
(Sur-rebuttal  covering  this  organization  appears  on  pages  3306  to  3308.) 


BROTHERHOOD  OF  LOCOMOTIVE  FIREMEN  AND  ENGINEMEN 


« 

Article 
Number 

COVERING 

Pages  of 
Proceedings 

2 

Basic  Day  and  Overtime — Passenger  Service 

2678   to   2690 

6 

Assignments — Hostlers  and  Hostler  Helpers 

2710    to   2714 

7 

Starting  Time — Hostlers  and  Hostler  Helpers 

2710    to   2714 

8 

Meal  Period — Hostlers  and  Hostler  Helpers 

2710   to   2714 

9 

Monthly,  Daily  or  Trip  Basis ■ 

2714   to   2719 

10 

Final  Terminal  Detention 

2719    to   2742 

n 

Deadheading 

2742  and  2743 

12 

Specified  Holidays — Overtime .' 

2743  and  2744 

13 

Held  Away  from  Home  Terminal 

2744  and  2745 

14 

Expenses  Away  from  Home 

2747 

15 

Monthly  Guarantees 

2747   to   2749 

16 

Mechanical  Stokers — Two  Firemen 

2749   to   2754 

17 

Mechanical  Coal  Passers 

2749    to   2754 

18 

Grate  Shakers — Fire  Door  Openers 

2749   to   2754 

20 

Removal  of  Tools  and  Supplies 

2755    to   2757 

21 

Flagging  and  Throwing  of  Switches 

"2757   to   2759 

22 

Taking  Fuel  and  Cleaning  Fires 

2759    and   2760 

23 

Investigations 

2761    to   2765 

24 

Interpretation  of  Agreements 

2765   to   2766 

25 

Conflicting  Rules  to  be  Changed ....". 

2766    and   2767 

26 

Saving  Clause 

2766   and   2767 

Sur-rebuttal 

3309 

36 


BROTHERHOOD  OF  LOCOMOTIVE  ENGINEERS 

The  above  organization  confined  their  request  to  changes  in  basis  daily  rates  and  did  not  present  any  request  for 
changes  in  rules  or  working  conditions. 

(Sur-rebuttal  covering  this  organization  appears  on  pages  3308  and  3309.) 


(COPY) 


Room  1864  Transportation  Building, 
Chicago,  111.,  January  5,  1921. 


Mr.  C.  P.  Carrithers, 

Secretary,  U.  S.  Railroad  Labor  Board, 
Kesner  Building,  Chicago,  111. 

Dear  Sir: 

Referring  to  your  letter  to  me  of  December  18th  and  my  reply  of  December  28th,  pertaining  to  the  hearing  set  for» 
Monday,  January  10th,  and  particularly  to  the  last  paragraph  of  my  letter  which  reads: 

"Our  Committee  reconvenes  in  Chicago  on  January  4th,  1921,  at  which  time  I  will  take  up  with  the  Committee 
the  order  in  which  we  will  present  our  views  and  will  advise  you  of  the  conclusion  of  the  Committee." 

The  letter  to  you  of  December  30th  from  Chief  Executives  Stone,  Carter,  Sheppard  and  Lee,  and  my  letter  to  you 
of  even  date  with  reference  to  the  letter  from  the  four  Chief  Executives,  formally  closes  the  respective  presentations  by 
both  parties  as  to  all  the  specific  requests  of  the  four  Transportation  Organizations  which  were  not  decided  in  Decision 
No.  2. 

As  to  the  requests  of  the  other  Organizations,  this  will  advise  that  our  Committee  expects  to  make  its  presentation 
in  the  following  order: 

1.  Shop  Crafts. 

2.  United  Brotherhood  of  Maintenance  of  Way  Employees  and  Railway  Shop  Laborers. 

3.  Brotherhood  of  Railway  and  Steamship  Clerks,  Freight  Handlers,  Express  and  Station  Employees. 

4.  Brotherhood  of  Railroad  Signalmen  of  America. 

5.  International  Brotherhood  of  Firemen  and  Oilers. 

6.  Switchmen's  Union  of  North  America. 

7.  Order  of  Railroad  Telegraphers. 

8.  American  Train  Dispatchers  Association. 

9.  Masters,  Mates  and  Pilots  of  America. 

10.     International  Association  of  Railroad  Supervisors  of  Mechanics. 

Yours  very  truly, 

(Signed)  E.  T.  WHITER, 
Chairman. 
Association  of  Railway  Executives. 
Conference  Committee  of  Managers. 


(Copy  of  this  letter  sent  to  persons  as  shown  on  list  next  attached.) 


Mr.  B.  M.  Jewell,  President, 

Railway  Employees'  Dept.,  A.  F.  of  L., 
4750  Broadway,  Chicago,  111. 

Mr.  S.  E.  Heberling,  President, 

Switchmen's  Union  of  North  America, 
39  North  Street,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Mr.  M.  F.  Ryan,  President, 

Brotherhood  of  Railway  Carmen  of  America, 
503  Hall  Building,  Kansas  City,  Mo. 

Mr.  W.  S.  Carter,  President, 
Brotherhood  of  L.  F.  &  E., 

901  Guardian  Bldg.,  Cleveland,  Ohio. 

Mr.  J.  A.  Franklin,  President, 

Int.  Bro.  of  Boilermakers,  Iron  Ship  Builders  & 
Helpers  of  America, 

315  Wyandotte  Bldg.,  Kansas  City,  Mo. 


Mr.  John  H.  Pruett, 

Masters,  Mates  &  Pilots  of  America, 
423-49th  St.,  Brooklyn,  New  York. 

Mr.  W.  G.  Lee,  President, 

Brotherhood  of  Railroad  Trainmen, 

American  Trust  Bldg.,  Cleveland,  Ohio. 

Mr.  J.  J.  Hynes,  President, 

Sheet  Metal  Workers  Int.  Alliance, 

122  So.  Ashland  Bldg.,  Chicago,  111. 

Mr.  Timothy  Healy,  President, 

Bro.  Stationary  Firemen  &  Oilers, 

211  East  45th  Street,  New  York,  N.  Y. 

Mr.  J.  G.  Luhrsen,  President, 

American  Train  Dispatchers  Assn., 
300  Mailers  Bldg.,  Chicago,  111. 


37 


Mr.  E,  J.  Manion,  President, 

Order  of  Railroad  Telegraphers, 

Missouri  State  Life  Bldg.,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

Mr.  W.  R.  Johnston,  President, 

International  Association  of  Machinists, 
Machinists  Bldg.,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Mr.  Jas.  P.  Noonan,  President, 

Int.  Bro.  of  Electrical  Workers, 

Machinists  Bldg.,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Mr.  L.  E.  Sheppard,  President, 
Order  of  Railway  Conductors, 

Masonic  Temple,  Cedar  Rapids,  Iowa. 

Mr.  J.  W.  Kline,  President, 

Int.  Bro.  of  Blacksmiths,  Drop  Forgers  &  Helpers, 
608  So.  Dearborn  St.,  Chicago,  111. 


Mr.  E.  H.  Fitzgerald,  President, 

Bro.  of  Railway  &  S.   S.   Clerks,   Frt.   Handlers, 
Express  and  Station  Employees, 

Second  Nat.  Bank,  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 

Mr.  W.  S.  Stone,  President, 

Bro.  of  Locomotive  Engineers, 

B.  of  L.  E.  Bldg.,  Cleveland,  Ohio. 

Mr.  D.  W.  Helt,  President, 

Bro.  Railway  Signalmen  of  America, 

Machinists  Bldg.,  Washington,  D.  C, 

Mr.  E.  P.  Grable,  President, 

United  Bro.  Maintenance  of  Way  Employees, 
27  Putnam  Avenue,  Detroit,  Mich. 

Mr.  W.  V.  O'Neil,  President, 

Int.  Assoc,  of  R.  R.  Supervisors  of  Mechanics, 
100  Arcade  Bldg.,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 


(COPY) 

RAILWAY  EMPLOYEES'  DEPARTMENT 
A.  F.  of  L. 


Headquarters,  Riviera  Building, 
4750  Broadway,  Chicago,  111. 

January  6,  1921. 
Mr.  C,  P.  Carrithers,  Secretary, 

United  States  Railroad  Labor  Board,  •  ^ 

Kesner  Building,  Chicago,  111. 

Dear  Sir: 

This  in  reply  to  your  letter  of  December  18th,  regarding  further  hearings  on  rules  now  pending  before  the  United 
States  Railroad  Labor  Board  and  Mr.  Whiter's  letter  of  January  5,  1921. 

If  the  Committee  representing  the  railroads  does  not  make  further  arguments  before  the  Board  on  rules  pertaining 
to  the  Switchmen,  it  is  my  desire  not  to  present  any  further  arguments  in  addition  to  what  has  been  presented  to  your 
Board  in  hearings  April,  1920.  Should  the  railroad  officials  make  further  arguments,  then  we  will  reserve  the  right  to 
offer  a  rebuttal. 

Yours  very  truly, 

(Signed)   B.  M.  JEWELL, 
President, 
Railway  Employees  Department,  A.  F.  L. 

(Signed)  S.  E.  HEBERLING. 
President, 
Switchmen's  Union  of  North  America. 
C.C.  Mr.  E.  T.  Whiter. 


38 


(COPY) 


Room  1864  Transportation  Bldg. 
Chicago,  111.,  Jan.  8,  1921. 


Mr,  C.  P.  Carrithers, 

Secretary,  U.  S.  Railroad  Labor  Board, 
Kesner  Building,  Chicago,  111. 

Dear  Sir: 

Referring  to  letter  to  you  under  date  of  January  6,  1921,  from  Mr.  B.  M.  Jewell,  President,  Railway  Employees 
Department,  American  Federation  of  Labor,  and  Mr.  S.  E,  Heberling,  President,  Switchmen's  Union  of  North  America 
(copy  of  which  letter  was  sent  to  me  by  Messrs.  Jewell  and  Heberling)  and  particularly  to  the  last  paragraph  of  the  letter, 
which  states: 

"If  the  Committee  representing  the  railroads  does  not  make  further  arguments  before  the  Board  on  rules 
pertaining  to  the  Switchmen,  it  is  my  desire  not  to  present  any  further  arguments  in  addition  to  what  has  been 
presented  to  your  Board  in  hearings  April,  1920.  Should  the  railroad  officials  make  further  arguments,  then  we 
will  reserve  the  right  to  offer  a  rebuttal."        " 

This  will  advise  that  otir  Committee  does  not  desire  to  make  further  arguments  than  have  been  heretofore  made 
in  our  presentation  in  response  to  the  requests  of  the  Switchmen,  which  appear  at  pages  2457  to  2459  of  the  transcript 
of  the  proceedings.  Therefore,  the  presentation  of  our  case  with  reference  to  the  Switchmen's  demands  is  formally 
closed. 

Yours  truly, 

(Signed)  E.  T.  WHITER, 
Chairman. 
Association  of  Railway  Executives. 
Conference  Committee  of  Managers. 
Copy  to 

Mr.  B.  M.  Jewell, 
Mr.  S.  E.  Heberling. 


30 


CLOSING  STATEMENT  MADE  BEFORE  THE  UNITED  STATES  RAILROAD  LABOR   BOARD    ON    FEBRUARY 
3,    1921,    WITH   REGARD    TO    THE    OBJECTIONS    OF   THE   RAILROADS   TO    THE    CONTINUATION 
OF    THE    SO-CALLED    NATIONAL    AGREEMENTS,    WAGE    ORDERS,    ADDENDA,    SUPPLE- 
MENTS, AND  INTERPRETATIONS,  AND  TO  RULES  AND  WORKING  CONDITIONS 
REQUESTED   BY  VARIOUS    ORGANIZATIONS. 

In  closing  the  statements  of  the  railroads  with  reference  to  the  requests  under  consideration  in  this  hearing,  viz. :  that 
all  the  so-called  National  Agreements  entered  into  by  the  United  States  Railroad  Administration,  the  wage  orders,  addenda, 
supplements,  interpretations,  etc.,  shall  be  continued  in  effect,  we  desire  to  emphasize  the  statements  contained  in  our 
opening  remarks. 

First :  That  there  is  no  obligation  upon  the  individual  railroads  to  accept  and  adopt  these  agreements,  wage  orders,  etc. 
to  which  they  were  not  a  party;  that  there  is  no  obligation  in  law  or  reason  that  they  should  be  required  to  adopt  these 
intricate,  complicated  and  extensive  regulations,  which  were  applied  throughout  the  United  States,  with  utter  disregard  of 
conditions  on  the  individual  properties  or  the  extraordinary,  in  many  cases  grotesque,  results  which  followed.  Further, 
that  the  necessity  for  specific  understanding  to  continue  these  agreements  was  plainly  recognized  by  the  Organizations 
who  were  parties  to  such  Agreements,  as  shown  by  their  letter  of  March  24,  1920,  quoted  in  the  proceedings  of  May  6, 
Volume  XVI,  commencing  at  page  1611,  as  follows: 

"Washington,  D. C,  Mar.  24,  1920. 

^^     "Mr.  E.  T.  Whiter,  Chairman, 

^H^  "Railway  Executives'  Conference  Committee,  , 

^H^^»  "Room  353,  Washington  Union  Station, 

^^^^B  "Washington,  D.  C. 

"Dear  Sir: 

"During  Government  Control  of  Railroads,  General  Orders,  Supplements,  Addenda,  National  Agreements, 
and  Interpretations  thereof  were  issued  by  the  United  States  Railroad  Administration,  as  result  of  negotiations 
conducted  with  the  organizations  parties  to  this  conference. 

"These  General  Orders,  Supplements,  Addenda,  National  Agreements  and  Interpretations  thereof  are  con- 
tinued in  effect  until  September  1,  1920,  except  as  amended  by  mutual  agreement  between  the  organizations 
and  managements  of  the  railroads  and  carriers  covered  by  the  Transportation  Act  of  1920. 

"In  the  interest  of  successful  operation,  it  is  desirable  that  definite  agreements  be  had  prior  to  September  1, 
1920,  providing  for  the  preservation  of  the  conditions  of  employment  thereafter,  and  that  these  agreements 
be  entered  into  at  the  earliest  possible  moment. 

"Therefore,  the  organizations,  parties  to  this  conference,  urge  that  the  Association  of  Railway  Executives 
delegate  your  committee  with  authority  to  enter  into  an  agreement  preserving  the  provisions  of  such  General 
Orders,  Supplements,  Addenda,  National  Agreements  and  Interpretations  thereof,  upon  all  railroads  and  carriers 
coming  under  the  provisions  of  the  Transportation  Act  of  1920. 

"BY  ORDER  OF  THE  COMMITTEE. 

"(Signed)  B.  M.  JEWELL,  Chairman, 

"Railway  Employees'  Conference  Committee." 

Further  that  the  terms  and  provisions  of  the  Transportation  Act  have  not  been  complied  with  with  respect  to  the 
requirement  that  bona  fide  efforts  must  be  made  to  reach  agreements  between  the  parties  directly  concerned  before  the 
controversies  can  be  submitted  to  your  Board.  We  hold  that  this  is  a  separate  and  distinct  phase  of  the  problem  before 
the  Board  and  that  this  phase  should  be  disposed  of  by  the  Board  independently  of  the  merits  of  the  respective  agreements 
and  the  individual  rules  contained  therein. 

Second:  Through  the  wage  orders,  addenda,  supplements,  interpretations,  etc.,  which  we  have  brought  to  the 
attention  of  the  Board,  we  feel  that  the  Board  will  recognize  that  through  the  provisions  of  Decision  No.  2  of  the  Labor 
Board,  that: 

"The  Board  assumes  as  the  basis  of  this  decision  the  continuance  in  full  force  and  effect  of  the  rules,  work- 
ing conditions  and  agreements  in  force  under  the  authority  of  the  United  States  Railroad  Administration.  Pending 
the  presentation,  consideration  and  determination  of  the  questions  pertaining  to  the  continuation  or  modification 
of  such  rules,  conditions  and  agreements,  no  changes  therein  shall  be  made  except  by  agreement  between  the 
carrier  and  employees  concerned.  As  to  all  the  questions  with  reference  to  the  continuation  or  modification  of 
such  rules,  working  conditions  and  agreements,  further  hearings  will  be  had  at  the  earliest  practicable  date  and 
decision  thereon  will  be  rendered  as  soon  as  adequate  consideration  can  be  given." 

many  bases  of  classification  of  service  for  purposes  of  pay,  application  of  rules,  etc.,  have  been  continued,  notwithstanding 
that  by  reference  to  the  terms  of  the  agreements  themselves,  they  terminated  February  29,  1920;  also  by  reference  to  Circular 
121  of  the  Director  General  it  will  be  found  that  he  states  that  decisions  by  the  Railroad  Administration,  Railway  Boards 
of  Adjustment,  Staff  Officers,  etc.,  were  not  to  extend  beyond  the  termination  of  Federal  control  of  the  Railroads,  viz.: 

40 


12.01  A.  M.,  March  1,  1920.  These  Boards  of  Adjustment  and  Staff  Officers  have  continued  to  render  decisions,  and  so 
far  as  known,  may  continue  to  render  decisions  as  long  as  they  exist,  affecting  the  responsibihty  of  the  Railroad  Adminis- 
tration, in  cases  occurring  during  the  period  of  Federal  Control.  Many  decisions  have  been  rendered  since  the  date  of 
Decision  No.  2.  Some  of  these  decisions  have  been  incorporated  in  our  presentation.  We  feel  that  your  Board  certainly 
did  not  in  Decision  No.  2  base  your  conclusions  on  decisions  of  these  Boards  of  Adjustment  which  had  not  theretofore  been 
rendered. 

From  the  provisions  of  Decision  No.  2  quoted  herein,  there  would  not  appear  to  be  any  doubt  of  the  intention  of  this 
Board  to  continue  the  bases  of  pay  resulting  from  the  decisions  of  proper  authorities  of  the  Railroad  Administration,  but 
it  is  very  properly  a  question  whether  this  Board  intended  to  vitalize  decisions  which  by  instructions  of  the  Director  General 
were  to  only  apply  up  to  the  end  of  Federal  control  and  continue  them  in  the  same  manner  as  it  did  acts  of  the  Railroad 
Administration  prior  to  the  date  of  its  decision. 

These  decisions  have  such  extensive  ramifications  and  are  so  utterly  out  of  all  reason  in  the  light  of  practical  conditions 
and  the  extravagant  payments  resulting,  as  repeatedly  stated  herein,  that  we  feel  the  only  practical  way  to  properly  dispose 
of  these  complications  is  by  negotiation  between  the  Managements  of  the  individual  properties  and  the  proper  representa- 
tives of  their  employees,  and  that  no  railroad  or  tribunal  could  justify  such  expenditures  and  expect  that  the  patrons  of  the 
railroads  should  pay  rates  or  producing  revenues  to  be  expended  in  such  a  manner. 


41 


RESOLUTION  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES  RAILROAD  LABOR  BOARD 

DATED  FEBRUARY  9,  1921,  AND  READ  INTO  RECORD 

AT  HEARING  HELD  FEBRUARY  10,  1921 


February    9,    1921. 

RESOLVED,  that  the  Chairman  be  authorized  to  make  the  following  announcement  at  10:00  A.  M.,  Thursday, 
February  10th: 

The  Board  has  considered  the  request  of  the  Association  of  Railway  Executives  as  presented  on  January  31st,  1921, 
and  has  made  its  decision  thereon. 

In  order  that  the  reasons  for  this  decision  may  be  understood,  a  statement  of  the  history  of  the  present  dispute  which 
relates  to  the  agreements,  rules  and  working  conditions  entered  into  or  authorized  by  the  United  States  Railroad  Adminis- 
tration and  their  justice  and  reasonableness  is  necessary. 

On  February  28,  1920,  the  Transportation  Act  became  law.  This  act  created  this  Board  and  imposed  upon  it  the  duty 
of  deciding  disputes  between  carriers  and  their  employees.  Section  307  (d)  of  the  Act  provides  that  all  the  decisions  of  the 
Labor  Board  in  respect  to  wages,  salaries  and  working  conditions  of  employees  of  carriers  shall  establish  rates  of  wages 
and  salaries  and  standards  of  working  conditions  which  in  the  opinion  of  the  Board  are  just  and  reasonable.  Prior  to  the 
passage  of  the  Transportation  Act,  the  organizations  of  railroad  employees  made  certain  requests  for  increases  in  wages 
and  for  changes  in  working  conditions.  These  requests  were  submitted  to  a  conference  between  representatives  of  the 
carriers  and  of  the  organizations  concerned  which  conference  took  place  on  March  10th,  1920,  and  continued  to  April  1st. 
The  conference  resulted  in  complete  failure  to  agree  and.  the  parties  accordingly  referred  the  entire  controversy,  which 
included  the  question  of  reasonable  rules  and  working  conditions  as  well  as  wages,  to  this  Board. 

This  Board  in  its  decision  of  July  20th,  1920,  Decision  No.  2,  decided  what  wages  constituted  just  and  reasonable 
wages  for  the  employees  of  carriers  parties  to  the  dispute.  The  action  of  the  Board  with  regard  to  that  part  of  the  dispute 
which  did  not  relate  to  wages  is  set  out  in  Decision  No.  2  as  follows: 

"There  are  in  the  dispute  as  presented  questions  involving  rules  and  working  conditions,  some  of  which  are 
interwoven  with  and  materially  affect  earnings  and  wages.  Adequate  investigation  and  consideration  of  these 
questions  would  demand  time.  Existing  conditions  required  that  the  Board  should  make  as  early  decision  of  the 
wage  question  as  practicable.  For  that  reason,  it  has  been  necessary, — and  both  parties  to  the  controversy  have 
indicated  it  to  be  their  judgment  and  wish,  that  the  Board  should  separate  the  questions  %ivolving  rules  and 
working  conditions  from  the  wage  questions.  Accordingly,  the  Board  has  not  undertaken  herein  to  consider  or 
change  the  rules  and  agreements  now  existing  or  in  force  by  the  authority  of  the  United  States  Railroad  Adminis- 
tration or  otherwise  and  this  decision  will  be  so  understood  and  applied. 

"  The  Board  assumes  as  the  basis  of  this  decision  the  continuance  in  full  force  and  effect  of  the  rules,  working 
conditions  and  agreements  in  force  under  the  authority  of  the  United  States  Railroad  Administration.  Pending 
the  presentation,  consideration  and  determination  of  the  questions  pertaining  to  the  continuation  or  modification  of 
such  rules,  conditions  and  agreements  no  changes  therein  shall  be  made  except  by  agreement  between  the  carrier 
and  employees  concerned.  As  to  all  questions  with  reference  to  the  continuation  or  modification  of  such  rules, 
working  conditions  and  agreements,  further  hearings  will  be  had  at  the  earliest  practicable  date  and  decision 
thereon  will  be  rendered  as  soon  as  adequate  consideration  can  be  given." 

On  December  18,  1920,  this  Board  notified  the  parties  to  the  dispute  that  a  hearing  of  that  portion  of  the  dispute 
which  was  submitted  to  the  Board  on  April  15,  1920,  and  which  was  not  decided  in  Decision  No.  2,  which  said  undecided 
portion  of  the  dispute  related  to  rules  and  working  conditions,  would  be  heard  beginning  Monday,  January  10,  1921. 

Accordingly,  on  that  date  the  representative  of  the  carriers  presented  evidence,  and  argument  tending  to  show  that 
the  rules  and  working  conditions  embodied  in  the  agreements  entered  into  by  the  Director  General  and  the  several  or- 
ganizations of  railroad  employees  were  in  many  respects  unjust  and  unreasonable  and  continued  to  present  evidence  and 
arguments  as  stated  until  February  3,  1921. 

On  January  31st,  1921,  the  Chairman  of  the  Labor  Committee  of  the  Association  of  Railway  Executives  appeared 
before  the  Board  and  urged  that  this  Board  at  once  take  the  following  action  in  order  to  avoid  a  financial  catastrophe  to 
the  railroads : 

First,  that  the  national  agreements,  rules  and  working  conditions  entered  into  or  authorized  by  the  United  States 
Railroad  Administration  be  terminated  at  once;  that  the  question  of  reasonable  rules  and  working  conditions  be  remanded 
to  negotiations  between  each  carrier  and  its  own  employees  and  that  as  the  basis  for  such  negotiations,  the  agreements, 
rules  and  working  conditions,  in  effect  as  of  December  31,  1917,  be  re-established, 

42 


Second,  that  the  Board  set  aside  its  decision  expressed  in  Decision  No.  2  as  to  what  constitutes  just  and  reasonable 
wages  for  unskilled  labor  and  that  it  substitute  the  prevailing  rate  of  wages  in  the  various  territories  served  by  any  carrier. 

Section  307  of  the  Transportation  Act,  1920,  provides: 

"All  the  decisions  of  the  Labor  Board  in  respect  to  wages  or  salaries  and  *****  j^  respect  to 
working  conditions  of  employees  or  subordinate  officials  of  carriers  shall  establish  rates  of  wages  and  salaries 
and  standards  of  working  conditions  which  in  the  opinion  of  the  Board  are  just  and  reasonable." 

It  is  obvious  that  the  Board  cannot  assume  without  evidence  of  the  justness  and  reasonableness  of  the  agreements,  rules 
and  working  conditions  in  effect  on  each  railroad  as  of  December  31,  1917,  that  such  agreements,  rules  and  working  con- 
ditions would  constitute  just  and  reasonable  rules  and  working  conditions  today  on  the  railroads  parties  to  the  present 
dispute.  To  make  such  a  decision  without  evidence  and  careful  consideration  would  be  an  abdication  of  the  functions  of 
this  Board  and  would  frustrate  the  purposes  of  the  Transportation  Act. 

It  is  the  judgment  of  the  Board,  therefore,  that  the  request  of  the  Association  of  Railway  Executives  for  the  immediate 
termination  of  existing  Rules  must  be,  and  is  accordingly  denied. 

The  duty  is  imposed  upon  this  Board  by  the  Transportation  Act  of  determining  just  and  reasonable  wages  and  working 
conditions  for  employees  of  carriers.  All  questions  involving  the  expense  of  operation  or  necessities  of  railroads  and  the 
amount  of  money  necessary  to  secure  the  successful  operation  thereof  are  under  the  jurisdiction,  not  of  this  Board,  but  of 
the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission. 

This  Board  is  not  insensible,  however,  of  the  fact  that  the  national  agreements,  rules  and  working  conditions  which  are 
the  subject  matter  of  the  dispute  now  being  heard  by  the  Board,  do  affect  the  expenditures  of  the  railroads.  If  any  of  these 
rules  and  working  conditions  are  unjust  and  unreasonable,  they  constitute  an  unwarranted  burden  upon  the  railroads  and 
upon  the  public.  It  is,  therefore,  the  duty  of  this  Board  to  use  the  utmost  practicable  expedition,  consistent  with  the 
necessary  time  for  hearing  and  consideration,  in  determining  whether  any  of  the  rules  and  working  conditions  now  in  effect 
are  unreasonable.  The  Board  is  endeavoring  to  perform  this  obligation  and  will  be  better  able  to  succeed  in  doing  so  if  it  is 
not  further  interrupted  by  the  introduction  of  unwarranted  demands  by  either  party. 

The  Board  must  also  deny  the  request  of  the  Association  of  Railway  Executives  as  presented  by  the  Chairman  of  its 
Labor  Committee  that  so  much  of  Decision  No.  2  as  fixed  wages  for  unskilled  labor  be  set  aside  and  the  prevaihng  rates  of 
wages  in  the  various  territories  served  by  any  carrier  substituted. 

The  boundaries  of  the  power  of  this  Board  to  decide  controversies  between  railroads  and  their  employees  are  set  out 
in  Section  307  of  the  Transportation  Act.     Section  307  (b)  provides: 

"The  Labor  Board  upon  the  application  of  the  Chief  executive  of  any  carrier  *  *  *  shall  receive  for 
hearing  and  as  soon  as  practicable  and  with  due  diligence  decide  all  disputes  with  respect  to  the  wages  or  salaries 
of  employees  not  decided  as  provided  in  Section  301." 

Section  301  provides  that  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  all  carriers  and  their  officers,  employees  and  agents  to  consider  dis- 
putes in  conference  between  representatives  designated  and  authorized  so  to  confer  by  the  carriers  or  the  employees  or 
subordinate  officials  thereof  directly  interested  in  the  dispute.  If  the  dispute  is  not  decided  in  conference,  it  shall  be 
referred  by  the  parties  to  the  Railroad  Labor  Board. 

It  does  not  appear  that  there  has  been  any  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  Association  of  Railway  Executives  to  secure 
conference  with  representatives  of  the  unskilled  laborers  directly  interested  in  this  controversy. 

The  Board  is  therefore  without  jurisdiction  to  take  the  action  requested. 

UNITED  STATES  RAILROAD  LABOR  BOARD. 

R.  M.  BARTON, 
Attest:  ■  Chairman. 

C.  P.  CARRITHERS, 

Secretary. 


43 


STATEMENT  OF  MR.  FRANK  P.  WALSH  ON  BEHALF  OF  THE  EMPLOYEES 

MADE  BEFORE  THE  UNITED  STATES  RAILROAD  LABOR  BOARD 

ON  FEBRUARY  10,  1921 

Mr.  Walsh:  May  it  please  the  Chairman  and  your  Honorable  Board:  It  would  not  be  amiss  for  me,  I  am  sure,  to 
observe  here,  that  in  the  opinion  of  those  whom  I  represent,  as  well  as  my  personal  opinion,  the  decision  which  you  have 
rendered  here,  and  the  laying  out  of  your  future  course,  is  perhaps  the  most  momentous  decision  that  has  ever  been  rendered 
in  the  United  States  as  far  as  our  citizenship  is  concerned,  outside  of  any  representation  which  I  have  here. 

This  Board  is  the  result  of  a  struggle — I  might  say  an  intellectual  struggle  and  one  abstracted  entirely  from  any  of 
the  ordinary  things  that  come  up  as  controversies  between  employers  and  employees,  because  it  is  the  final  co-ordinated 
thought  of  all  of  those  publicists  and  representatives  of  our  government  that  have  studied  the  industrial  and  economic 
phenomena  of  this  country  and  have  arrived  at  this  in  a  basic  industry  as  the  spear  point  which  points  directly  to  some 
other  settlement  of  controversies  that  aflfect  all  of  our  citizenship,  than  the  attributes  heretofore  known  that  occurred  in 
industrial  struggles.  They  involve  everything,  so  far  as  these  immediate  organizations  are  concerned — the  struggle  for 
organization,  the  right  of  collective  bargaining,  the  right  of  an  orderly  effort,  first,  between  employer  and  employee  to 
adjust  their  differences,  and  finally  an  appeal  to  a  forum  of  such  integral  strength,  as  far  as  this  organization  is  concerned 
and  of  such  personnel  that  men  will  be  willing  to  surrender  certain  natural  rights  for  the  benefit  of  society  as  a  whole,  that 
lam  going  to  undertake  to  say — and  I  am  going  to  keep  within  the  suggestion  of  the  Chairman,  because  I  know  the  very 
great  value  of  your  time — I  am  going  still  to  observe  that  had  it  been  permitted  for  the  orderly  conduct  of  this  judicial 
hearing  to  be  interrupted,  it  would  be  parallel  to  the  unthinkable  scene  of  a  gentleman  interested  deeply  and  financially 
in  a  case  coming  before  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  where  the  issues  had  been  framed,  and  where  con- 
sideration of  the  Justices  was  about  to  be  had  and  argument  was  about  to  be  made,  to  intervene  and  have  a  party  ask 
the  Chief  Justice  to  suggest  to  that  Honorable  Body  that  it  should  at  once  desist  in  its  orderly  deliberations  for  the  reason 
that  he  represented  the  defendants  in  the  case,  who  were  upon  trial  and  that  the  judgment  of  that  Court  would  be  ren- 
dered nugatory,  because  they  would  not  comply  with  it,  first,  because  they  were  not  financially  able  to  comply  with  it, 
and  follow  it  by  saying  that  if  the  Court  did  not  desist  in  that  hearing  they  were  in  a  position,  through  their  power  and 
influence,  and  through  those  whom  they  represented,  so  to  burden  the  Court  with  litigation  of  this  character  that  it 
would  be  destroyed. 

Again,  had  this  Honorable  Body  listened  to  the  suggestion  that  these  rules  and  agreements  which  affect  the  whole 
industry,  and  which  affect  the  cost  of  the  industry  be  abandoned  without  a  hearing,  and  that  300,000  men  should  have 
their  wages  reduced  on  account  of  the  alleged  necessity  of  their  employers,  that  again  would  be  comparable  to  Mr.  Jewell 
appearing  here  for  these  workers  and  calling  attention  to  the  fact,  for  instance,  that  the  Delaware  &  Lackawanna  Railroad 
had  applied  to  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  for  permission  to  distribute  their  surplus  in  a  new  stock  issue  to  their 
stockholders,  amounting  to  something  like  $100,000,000,  and  for  Mr.  Jewell  to  appear  here  on  behalf  of  the  men  of  that 
road,  and  of  the  Chicago,  Burlington  &  Quincy,  which  is  similarly  situated,  and  urge  upon  the  Board  the  fact  that  these 
companies  were  very  rich  and  had  made  a  great  deal  of  money,  and  therefore  the  employees  were  entitled  to  a  greater 
division  of  that  money,  and  having  discovered  that,  they  proposed  to  stop  the  operations  of  the  Board  unless  this  Board 
immediately  made  a  finding  that  their  wages,  with  probably  a  retroactive  clause,  should  be  increased  100  per  cent,  on 
account  of  the  fact  these  railroads  were  rich  and  amply  able  to  pay  them. 

So,  I  say  the  decision  of  this  Honorable  Board  goes  far  beyond  the  representation  which  I  have  the  honor  to  make 
here  today,  vast  as  that  is,  and  much  as  it  means  to  the  wives  and  families  of  millions  of  men  engaged  in  the  most  neces- 
sary industry  of  our  whole  social  life.  I  had  prepared  here  to  answer  the  suggestions  of  Mr.  Atterbury  with  reference 
to  the  advisability  or  to  the  power,  under  the  law  of  your  Board,  considering  the  question  of  the  financial  ability  of  a  rail- 
road to  pay,  and  I  might  suggest  it  in  a  word,  that  your  opinion  follows  not  only  the  best  thought  of  those  who  have  studied 
this  question  for  generations  as  applicable  to  all  industry,  as  well  as  the  railroad  industry,  but  you  followed  the  intent 
of  the  law,  as  expressed  over  and  over  again  by  its  framers  in  the  words  that  society  has  agreed  upon  wherever  it  has  spoken, 
and  that  is — that  the  first  charge  upon  any  industry  is  a  just  and  adequate  wage  to  those  who  carry  it  upon,  and  that  the 
basis  of  that  is  a  living  wage  to  the  humblest  employee  who  performs  a  necessary  task  in  the  productivity  of  that  industry 
r  and  if  that  cannot  be  done,  then  that  industry  is  a  parasitical  industry  and  the  State  should  take  it  over  or  it  should  be 
abolished  as  a  menace  to  the  fabric  of  the  entire  State. 

Now,  ruling  as  you  have  in  this  case,  the  gentlemen  whom  I  represent  are  now  confronted  with  the  consideration  of 
the  main  question  that  was  under  consideration  by  your  Honorable  Board. 

The  success  of  a  judicial  institution,  such  as  this  is,  and  while  this  is  an  administrative  board  and  is  limited  in  its 
powers  to  the  express  provisions  of  the  statute,  very  little  reflection  will  bring  you  to  the  thought  that  this  body  has  powers 
greater  than  was  dreamed  of  in  the  delegation  of  judicial  power  to  our  courts,  even  in  my  time.  It  has  the  power  con- 
ferred upon  it, as  a  Board  to  inquire  into  the  condition  of  the  industry  involved  here  and  elsewhere.  It  gives  a  great  power, 
f although  this  is  a  Board  that  acts  as  a  whole,  composed  of  nine  members,  to  the  individual  members  of  the  Board,  not 
only  to  make  personal  inquiry  tmder  order  of  the  Board  away  from  the  sittings  of  the  Board,  but  by  the  power  of  subpoena 
land  the  duces  tecum,  enforced  by  the  strong  arm  of  the  Federal  judiciary,  can  each  individual  inquire  into  those  things 
which  he  thinks  are  competent  and  necessary  for  a  proper  consideration  of  the  case. 

44 


Now,  then,  we  come  to  this  National  Agreement.  First,  the  suggestion  is  made  and  sent  broadcast  that  this  body 
would  have  the  power  to  pass  upon  the  question  of  the  rights  of  three  hundred  thousand  men  so  far  as  wages  are  concerned, 
without  a  consideration  of  the  case.  Second,  it  carries  the  thought,  and  it  has  been  carried  broadcast  in  this  country, 
that  unless  this  body  acts,  and  acts  quickly,  that  a  great  public  calamity  is  about  to  fall,  that  the  railroads  of  this  country 
are  about  to  go  into  bankruptcy,  and  therefore  throw  the  entire  country  into  chaos.  That  has  a  very  great  bearing  on 
the  presentation  of  our  case. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  not  true,  as  expressed  in  the  statement  of  the  Railroad  Executives,  through  Mr.  Atterbury, 
that  those  rules  are  wartime  regulations  imposed  upon  the  railroads  in  the  exigencies  of  the  world  war. 

Again,  they  say  that  if  you  fail  to  do  this,  you  are  violating  the  pledge  of  the  President  as  to  the  conservation  of  the 
rights  of  the  stockholders. 

And  another  item,  to  which  I  very  much  desire  to  address  myself,  is  the  taking  from  its  conte5ct  of  a  statement  made 
by  the  National  War  Labor  Board  to  the  effect  that  the  war  was  to  be  looked  upon  as  an  industrial  interregnum  in  which 
one  side  was  not  to  take  advantage  of  another,  and  arguing  from  that  that  you  should  immediately  permit  these  railroad 
companies,  organized  in  the  first  place  as  large  units  in  corporate  life,  added  to  by  organizations  again  of  those  units,  super- 
added the  organizations  of  the  Executives  and  the  Managers  of  these  Railroads — that  these  were  to  be  allowed  to  continue, 
but  that  the  employees,  on  account  of  these  expressions  of  the  Government  were  to  be  relegated  to  conditions  such  as 
existed  in  1917.  In  other  words,  that  the  combined  organizations  of  all  the  railroads  with  the  direct  command  of  the 
Transportation  Act  which  created  this  Board,  that  those  railroads  should  consolidate  for  economic  purposes,  ready  to 
consolidate,  ready  to  adjust  rates,  organized  as  a  national  unit  on  account  of  reasons  so  compelling  that  all  branches  of 
our  Government  have  acceded  to  it  and  taken  action  upon  it,  that  with  that  highly  intensive  organization  of  the  railroads 
of  this  country,  that  you  are  by  your  ipsi  dixit  to  relegate  these  men  to  the  conditions  of  1917. 

We  say  that  there  is  nothing  in  this  situation  that  calls  for  precipitate  action.  We  say  that  the  National  Agreements, 
so  called,  were  in  effect  upon  fifty  per  cent  of  the  railroads  of  this  country  before  there  was  any  war.  It  was  the  result 
of  the  effort  of  years  to  establish  just  conditions.  And  I  say,  and  say  it  without  any  offense,  that  the  conditions  referred 
to  by  Mr.  Atterbury  as  the  conditions  that  obtained  in  1917,  he  clearly  conceives  to  be  the  conditions  which  obtained  upon 
the  Pennsylvania  Railroad. 

In  a  small  duty  which  I  had  to  perform  in  this  industrial  field,  in  a  body  constituted  much  as  yours,  but  without  the 
power  of  decision — the  United  States  Commission  of  Industrial  Relations — we  were  charged  by  the  Government  to  investi- 
gate the  conditions  of  the  railroads  in  the  United  States.  And  upon  that  Board  was  a  Railroad  President  and  the  executive 
of  one  of  the  great  railway  brotherhoods.  And  when  we  came  to  select  the  typical  railroads,  those  representatives  upon 
that  Board  were  permitted  by  the  balance  of  the  Board  to  select  the  two  railroads  that  best  typified  what  one  side  claimed 
was  the  modern  thought,  of  the  right  of  the  men  to  collective  bargaining,  the  adjustment  of  disputes,  first  by  conference 
between  the  heads,  and  second  by  an  orderly  appeal  to  arbitration,  and  those  roads  which  denied  those  principles,  that 
were  the  most  backward — the  road  that  was  most  backward  in  accepting  the  ordinary  rights  of  citizenship  and  of  organiza- 
tion to  its  employees.  And  it  is  significant  to  find  that  the  roads  picked  were  the  Chicago,  Milwaukee  &  St.  Paul,  as  the 
fair  road,  and  the  Pennsylvania  road,  as  the  most  backward  road  in  the  United  States.         / 

An  investigation  of  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad  shows  clearly  the  basis  that  they  desire  to  go  back  to.  I  say  first 
as  the  representative  of  these  men,  and  second,  as  a  citizen  of  the  United  States,  God  forbid  that  we  should  ever  go  back 
to  that.  It  involves  the  absolute  destruction  of  the  right  of  free  speech.  It  destroys  the  absolute  right  declared  by  every 
body  that  ever  passed  upon  the  subject  that  men  had  a  right  to  organize  and  bargain  collectively.  It  involves  in  times  of 
peace  the  keeping  of  a  standing  private  army,  as  was  proven  against  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad,  with  all  of  the  instruments 
of  warfare  under  private  command,  a  constant  menace  to  the  State,  and  begrudging  recognition  of  the  powerful  brother- 
hoods that  move  their  trains  because  it  had  been  reluctantly  forced  upon  them,  and  a  never-ceasing,  every-day  campaign 
to  destroy  the  right  of  such  men  as  they  ask  here  to  wipe  away  their  earnings,  to  organize  and  try  to  have  a  collective  voice 
to  get  better  conditions. 

I  simply  wish  to  say  this  further,  that  the  statement  of  Mr.  Atterbury  presents  facts  that  are  of  the  utmost  pertinency 
in  the  consideration  that  you  are  about  to  give  to  this  question.  For  instance,  as  to  the  costs  of  the  working  rules  as  they 
are.     Mr.  Atterbury  was  again — I  am  sorry  to  say — lacking  in  frankness. 

If  the  abolition  of  these  rules  would  make  a  saving  of  three  hundred  millions  of  dollars  a  year,  that  would  be  but  five 
per  cent  of  their  operating  earnings.     Therefore,  his  conclusion  is  lacking  in  logic.     It  could  not  destroy  the  railroads. 

Again,  I  am  very  much  afraid  that  Mr.  Atterbury  received  his  conclusions  from  other  hands.  And  I  have  found  them 
on  a  slight  investigation  to  be  extremely  variable.  Mr.  Atterbury,  before  your  Honorable  Board,  stated  that  the  abolition 
of  the  National  Agreements  would  result  in  a  saving  to  the  railroads  of  three  hundred  millions  of  dollars.  We  have  a 
statement  given  to  the  press  for  release  on  the  same  day  by  Mr.  T,  Dewitt  Cuyler,  which  was  recalled  on  account  of  the  appear- 
ance of  Mr.  Atterbury  before  your  Board,  in  which  Mr.  Cuyler  stated  that  the  National  Agreements  had  increased  railroad 
expenses  to  the  extent  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  million  dollars  a  year — ^just  one-half  of  what  Mr.  Atterbury  stated  here. 

Mr.  Atterbury,  before  the  Philadelphia  Chamber  of  Commerce,  surrounded  by  gentlemen  that  perhaps  had  the  same 
general  object  in  view,  stated  before  starting  for  here,  and  a  day  or  two  before,  that  the  result  of  the  National  Agree- 
ments, as  applied  to  the  railroads,  after  war  time,  had  been  to  increase — if  maintained,  would  increase  the  cost  of  main- 
tenance of  equipment  from  five  hundred  millions  before  the  war  to  four  billions,  or  an  increase  of  three  billions  five  hundred 
million  dollars. 

45 


Another  release  trom  Philadelphia  in — no,  that  was  his  interview  in  the  Philadelphia  Inquirer  before  he  came.  In 
his  speech  before  the  Chamber  of  Commerce  he  said  that  the  National  Agreements  were  costing  the  railroad  companies 
five  hundred  million  dollars  per  year. 

We  find  on  an  investigation — and  I  might  say  this  and  say  it  very  briefly,  that  the  statement  Mr.  Atterbury  made 
here  might  indicate  to  the  unthinking  that  the  railroads  of  this  cotmtry  were  on  the  verge  of  bankruptcy.  There  are  rail- 
roads in  this  country  upon  the  verge  of  bankruptcy,  of  course.  They  were  inconsiderately  built.  They  had  no  public  to 
serve  commensurate  with  the  building  of  the  road  and  the  amount  of  the  investment.  They  are  chronically  in  a  state  of 
bankruptcy.  They  have  gone  in  and  they  have  gone  out.  The  railroads  of  this  country  are  stronger  financially  today, 
and  stronger,  not  on  account  of  the  backing  they  received  from  the  United  States  Government,  but  stronger  on  account 
of  the  Absolute  increase  in  their  traffic  and  the  reduction  in  operating  expenses  measured,  compared  to  the  increase  in  their 
traffic,  than  they  ever  have  been  in  the  history  of  our  whole  country. 

There  are  other  railroads,  as  we  thoroughly  understand,  that  have  been  so  mismanaged — mismanaged,  some  of  them, 
as  evidence  has  shown  in  court  proceedings,  to  the  point  of  criminality,  that  they  were  brought  to  the  verge  of  bankruptcy 
and  are  only  now  coming  out  of  it.  But  certainly  that  is  not  a  reason  for  your  Honorable  Board  to  suspend  its  functions, 
nor  should  it  be  used  as  a  reason  to  set  aside  rules  that  were  found  just  and  equitable,  and  to  reduce  the  wages  of  men 
below  the  cost  of  living,  where  they  are,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  at  the  present  time. 

Class  one  has  ninety  per  cent  of  the  mileage  of  the  United  States.  Oh,  I  might  say  with  respect  to  bankrupt  roads, 
that  includes,  of  course,  roads  that  are  not  in  class  one,  some  of  them. 

Class  one  has  ninety  per  cent  of  the  niileage  of  the  United  States.  The  total  surplus  on  hand,  the  total  credit  surplus 
of  those  railroads  is  three  billion  ten  million  dollars. 

Two  hundred  in  class  one,  or  about  170  of  those  railroads  show  that  surplus,  a  credit  surplus  of  three  hundred  and 
ten  million  dollars. 

There  are  only  thirty-two  that  show  a  deficit.     And  that  includes  these  mismanaged  roads. 

And  the  total  aggregate  deficit  amounts  to  but  one  hundred  and  sixteen  million  dollars,  so  that  they  have  a  net  surplus, 
all  of  the  roads  in  class  one,  of  two  billion  and  eight  hundred  million  dollars. 

Now,  the  legislators,  the  law-making  power,  when  they  created  this  Board,  of  which  you  are  so  important  a  part,  had 
this  very  idea  in  mind,  so  they  provided  for  the  consolidation  of  these  roads  in  groups,  which  is  already  going  on.  And 
these  roads  when  consolidated  will  be  so  managed,  and  the  earnings  so  distributed,  that  those  roads  that  have  been  dis- 
criminated against  by  improper  competitive  conditions,  and  other  things  that  it  is  not  necessary  for  me  to  go  into  now, 
will  be  placed  more  closely  upon  an  equality  with  the  other  roads,  and  for  the  sake  of  serving  the  whole  United  States  it 
is  believed,  and  1  believe,  that  all  of  those  roads  will  be  placed  upon  a  solid  financial  basis. 

Again,  the  short  line  railroads,  included,  of  course,  in  this  general  situation  the  tonnage  upon  them,  but  from  twenty 
to  forty  per  cent  originates  and  ends  upon  the  small  roads.  In  other  words,  from  sixty  to  eighty  per  cent  of  the  tonnage 
that  is  initiated  upon  the  small  roads,  finally  finds  its  way  on  a  part  of  its  journey  over  the  long  roads. 

Now,  experience  has  shown  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  and  all  of  those  who  have  investigated  this  subject, 
that  the  more  powerful  roads  have  had  a  very  strong  influence  upon  these  smaller  roads,  in  that  they  are  in  a  position  to 
take  a  greater  share  of  the  result  of  the  work  of  the  small  roads  than  they  are  entitled  to  for  the  length  of  the  haul  which 
they  make.  So  this  law  which  created  this  Board  has  also  provided  that  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  has  a  right 
to  readjust  the  rates  of  the  small  roads,  interstate  or  intrastate,  in  order  that  they  shall  bear  a  more  honest  and  juster 
relation  to  the  whole  haul  and  take  into  consideration  the  necessities  of  those  small  roads;  in  other  words,  to  pay  them  ade- 
quate pay  for  the  service.  That  has  already  been  begun  and  is  going  on,  so  they  will  have  the  vitality,  the  blood  will  be 
given  to  those  smaller  roads  as  well. 

Now,  in  view  of  the  statements  that  have  been  made  here,  that  the  result  of  the  National  Agreements — and  that  is 
a  subject,  of  course,  for  your  very  earnest  and  proper  consideration — that  it  has  resulted  in  great  waste — I  would  not 
properly  represent  those  whom  I  represent  here,  if  I  did  not  say  that  that  is  not  the  truth,  that  it  is  not  typical. 

It  was  our  very  proud  reflection  that  ours  was  the  only  country  during  the  great  war  where  the  industries — all  of  the 
industries  were  carried  on  without  the  loss  of  one  day's  production  in  essential  war  industry  on  account  of  labor  disputes. 
In  other  words,  notwithstanding  the  War  Labor  Board  had  to  take  within  its  jurisdiction  disputes  involving  almost  three 
million  employees,  there  never  was  such  a  cessation  in  labor  as  to  cause  one  day's  loss  to  essential  labor  productivity  in 
this  country.  And  I  want  to  say  that  that  applies  to  the  workers  whom  I  represent  as  well.  I  want  to  say  that  that  state- 
ment that  great  wastage  had  resulted  may  find  its  basis  before  your  body — and  the  further  efforts  that  may  be  made  when 
you  come  to  consider  this  whole  case —  the  basis  may  be  found  in  the  fact  that  those  railroads  are  now  presenting  claims 
against  our  Government  arnounting  to  millions  of  dollars,  much  of  which  is  based  upon  the  alleged  waste  under  Govern- 
ment ownership.  But  if  they  could  get  a  finding,  even  inferentially  from*this  Board  upon  this  full  hearing,  and  I  say — 
and  I  think  I  say  it  without  undue  prejudice,  that  perhaps  that  was  a  large  part  of  the  animative  force  behind  this  state- 
ment of  Mr.  Atterbury  and  those  whom  he  represented,  because  if  they  could  get  even  an  inferential  finding  from  this 
Board  that  there  was  such  waste,  it  would  be  of  immense  value  in  adjusting'those  disputes  that  are  placed  in  a  concentrated 
way  and  outside  of  the  courts  in  a  way  that  has  never  been  known  to  our  country  before  and  is  a  part  of  the  alleged  exi- 
gencies growing  out  of  the  great  war. 

46 


Now,  we  have  gathered  here  and  we  ask  to  present  it  in  connection  with  the  request  that  we  are  going  to  make  of  this 
Board,  as  to  subpoenaing  of  witnesses  for  the  hearing  that  is  now  to  proceed — 

The  Chairman:  Of  course,  counsel  will  bear  in  mind  the  resolution  passed  by  the  Board,  and  consider  how  far  that 
should  limit  the  views  to  be  presented. 

Mr.  Walsh:  Yes.  I  will  do  that,  Mr.  Chairman.  I  am  doing  that.  Naturally,  of  course,  this  finding — we  came  in 
response  to  this  letter  and  this  finding  was  somewhat  of  a  surprise  to  us.  But  I  am  trying  not  to  trench  upon  those 
instructions  that  the  Board  have  indicated  we  should  have  in  mind.  Nevertheless,  now,  we  are  going  on  with  this  hear- 
ing, and  I  am  leading  up  to  a  request  that  we  are  about  to  make  for  the  subpoenaing  of  wituesses  on  the  whole  question 
of  the  abolition  of  National  rules. 

The  Chairman:  It  occurs  to  my  mind,  of  course,  the  Chair  never  can  anticipate  what  a  gentleman  is  going  to  say, 
and  some  times  we  all  take  a  running  jump. 

Mr.  Walsh:     Yes,  we  do. 

The  Chairman:     Before  we  think. 

Mr.  Walsh:     And  we  jump  too  far  when  we  are  not  prepared  some  times. 

The  Chairman:  Yes,  And  some  times  make  a  good  m&ny  remarks  in  the  premises.  The  Chair  can  never  anticipate, 
but  it  occurs  to  me  that  you  might  be  going  to  address  us  on  the  question  of  taking  evidence  on  a  subject — 

Mr.  Walsh   (interrupting)  I  am. 

The  Chairman:     (Continuing) — that  is — 

Mr.  Walsh:     (Interrupting) — That  is  still  left  to  the  Board. 

The  Chairman:     Well,  of  course,  I  just  want  to  caution  you  on  that. 

Mr.  Walsh:     Yes. 

The  Chairman:     And  request  you  to  expedite  the  hearing  and  not  go  into  water  that  has  passed  over  the  dam. 

Mr.  Walsh:  I  will  remember  that,  Mr.  Chairman.  And  I  am  coming  to  my  request  now,  and  I  wish  to  say  this,  to 
sum  it  up  by  saying  that  the  railroads  are  not  in  a  dangerous  condition;  that  the  employees  whom  I  represent  have  not  been 
derelict  in  their  duty;  they  have  not  wasted  the  substance  of  the  railroad  companies;  they  have  not  added  improperly  to 
the  costs  of  railroad  operation ;  that  Mr.  Atterbury 's  statement  here  is  a  part  of  an  effort  to  establish  in  this  country  what 
they  call  the  open  shop;  that  he  represents  not  only  his  railroad  company,  but  he  represents  the  banking  control  that  are 
engaged  at  the  present  time  in  that  effort;  that  the  open  shop,  as  it  was  developed  in  the  steel  investigation,  operated  by 
the  same  gentlemen  whose  names  I  am  about  to  give  you  and  ask  to  be  subpoenaed  before  your  Honorable  Board,  were 
forced  through  their  representatives  to  confess  that  their  open  shop  movement  meant  an  effort  to  crush  every  labor  union 
in  the  United  States;  that  their  open  shop  movement  that  in  this  temporary  period  of  depression,  which  Mr.  Atterbury 
says  will  be  over  in  a  few  months — that  during  that,  they  want  a  strict  espionage  upon  the  personnel  of  their  employees, 
and  to  discharge  any  man  that  carries  a  union  card;  that  it  was  their  intention  to  absolutely  wipe  out  every  advance  that 
has  been  made  along  the  line  of  collective  bargaining  and  just  and  adequate  cooperation  between  employee  and  employer. 

I  am  going  to  give  the  Board  the  names  of  the  Directors  of  those  railroads.  Twelve  of  them  have  financial  control, 
of  90  per  cent  of  Class  1  railroads.  Mr.  Atterbury  presumably  only  speaks  for  those  who  are  in  control.  We  will  submit 
to  you  now  the  names  of  the  gentlemen  whom  we  say  have  the  knowledge  of  the  condition  of  the  railroads  in  this  country 
and  that  are  the  moving  force,  the  gentlemen  that  were  behind  these  statements  made  by  Mr.  Atterbury,  the  complete 
disclosure  of  the  incorrectness  of  which  is  prevented  at  this  moment  by  the  ruling  of  your  Honorable  Body. 

Mr.  Hunt :     Mr.  Chairman,  may  I  ask  Mr.  Walsh  one  or  two  questions-* 

The  Chairman:     Yes. 

Mr.  Walsh:     Yes,   Mr.   Hunt, 

Mr.  Hunt:  I  think  the  Board  would  like  to  know  what  you  expected  to  prove  by  these  witnesses.  It  is  possible  that 
the  Board  may  then  be  able  to  determine  whether  or  not  their  testimony,  if  given — 

Mr.  Walsh:     (Interrupting)  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Hunt:     (Continuing) — would  be  relevant  to  the  main  subject. 

Mr.   Walsh:     Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Hunt:     That  is,  the  reasonableness  of  rules  in  effect  on  the  railroads  now,  and  what  rules  would  be  reasonable. 

Mr.  Walsh:     Yes. 

Mr.  Hunt:     In  case  those  are  not. 

Mr.  Walsh:  Yes.  Well,  we  must  have  a  background  for  that;  as  I  understand  from  the  ruling  of  the  Board  just 
made  this  morning,  they  have  a  right  to  take  into  consideration,  and  are  going  to  take  into  consideration  the  reasonableness 

47 


of  these  rules,  a  part  of  the  consideration  of  which  will  come  from  the  fact  whether  they  were  wasteful  or  not,  and  whether 
they  did  through  their  application  unnecessarily  impose  burdens  upon  the  railroad  companies  which  ought  not  to  be 
imposed. 


Now,  we  propose  to — the  statement  is  made  by  Mr.  Atterbury  that  that  is  the  case- 
men  who  know  better  than  anyone  else  that  that  is  not  the  case. 

Mr.  Hunt:     That  what  is  not  the  case? 


and  we  propose  to  show  by  these 


Mr.  Walsh:  That  there  has  not  been  wastage  on  account  of  those  rules,  that  the  rules — we  will  endeavor  to  show 
by  those  gentlemen  that  the  rules  have  imposed  no  burden  upon  the  railroad  companies. 

Mr.  Hunt:  Well,  according  to  your  argument,  and  as  I  understand  it,  it  would  not  make  any  difference  whether  the 
rules  imposed  a  burden  on  the  companies  or  not,  if  they  were  just  and  reasonable  rules,  would  it? 

Mr.  Walsh:     Well,  an  unnecessary  or  an  improper  burden  upon  the  companies. 

I  am  trying  to  answer  now,  very  quickly,  the  suggestion  made  in  your  statement  here.  If  I  gather  the  statement, 
you  are  not  going  to  consider,  of  course,  I  think  that  is  very  clear, — the  financial  ability  of  the  railroads  to  pay. 

But,  you  are  going  to  consider,  as  I  understand  it,  the  question  as  to  whether  the  imposition  of  those  rules,  or  the 
continuation  of  those  rules  results  in  wastage,  improper  wastage,  thus  placing  a  burden  upon  the  railroads  that  they 
ought  not  to  have. 

Mr.  Hunt:  Mr.  Walsh  knows  too  well  the  rules  of  evidence  for  me  to  make  the  slightest  suggestion  that  it  is  necessary 
for  us  to  confine  ourselves,  if  we  are  to  make  progress,  to  matters  that  are  really  relevant  to  our  main  problem. 

Mr.  Walsh*     I  think  so. 

Mr.  Hunt:     And  with  that  remark,  I  will  say  no  more. 

Mr.  Walsh:     I  think  so,  yes. 

The  Chairman:  The  only  other  suggestion  the  Chair  cares  to  make  is — rather,  I  make  it  as  a  member  of  the  Board, 
and  not  as  Chairman,  because  I  only  make  rulings  when  the  Board  authorizes  me  to — is  that  it  struck  me  that  probably 
you  were  drifting  off  into  a  subject  and  an  examination  that  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  had  taken  up. 

The  President  in  his  reply  points  out  that  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  has  jurisdiction — in  reply  to  the  com- 
munications that  were  made  to  him  on  this  subject  by  the  respective  parties,  that,  "The  Interstate  Commerce  Commission 
has  full  jurisdiction  of  all  questions  involving  the  expense  of  operation,  the  necessities  of  the  railroads,  and  the  amount  of 
money  necessary  to  secure  the  successful  operation  thereof." 

Of  course,  the  Chair  will  not  prevent  you  from  making  any  request  that  you  want  to. 

Mr.  Walsh:     Certainly.  •  ^ 

The  Chairman:     And  the  Board  can  then  act  on  it. 

Mr.  Walsh:     Certainly,  certainly.     That  is  all  I  wish  to  do.     I  wish  to  submit  it,  of  course. 

The  Chairman:     Yes. 

Mr.  Walsh:  I  have  the  names  set  out  here  in  a  little  memorandum,  and  I  will  just  submit  them  to  the  Board,  with 
the  request  that  as  we  proceed  with  the  consideration  of  the  rules  and  National  Agreements  that  these  gentlemen  be  sub- 
poenaed. 

The  Chairman:     Hand  them  to  the  Official  Reporter. 

Mr.  Hanger:     I  think,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  it  might  be  well  to  have  those  names  read  for  the  information  of  the  Board. 

The  Chairman:     That  will  be  done. 

Mr.  Hanger:     And  the  representatives  of  the  railroads. 

(     Mr.  Walsh:     We  want — we  request  that  Mr.  Atterbury  and  his  sub-committee  on  labor — I  have  not  the  names, 
but  Mr.  Jewell  or  Mr.  Lauck  will  supply  them  to  you,  be  subpoenaed. 

The  Chairman:     Well,  read  those  that  you  have  requested. 

Mr.  Walsh: 

Julius  Kreuttschnitt, 
Chas.  E.  IngersoU, 
E.  T.  Stotesbury, 
E.  V.  R.  Thayer, 
T.  deWitt  Cuyler, 
H.  Walters, 


1. 

Robert  S.  Lovett, 

8. 

L.  F.  Loree, 

14. 

J.  E.  Reynolds, 

20. 

2. 

Wm.  Rockefeller, 

9. 

A.  J.  County, 

15. 

Chas.  Steele, 

21. 

3. 

H.  W.  deForest, 

10. 

A.  W.  Krech, 

16. 

Howard  Elliot, 

22. 

4. 

A.  H.  Smith, 

11. 

F.  H.  Davis,    . 

17. 

M.  H.  Smith, 

23. 

5. 

G.  F.  Baker, 

12. 

Fairfax  Harrison, 

18. 

Chas.  Hay  den, 

24. 

6. 

H.  S.  Vanderbilt, 

13. 

W.  W.  Atterbury. 

19. 

A.  H.  Harris, 

25. 

7. 

Samuel  Rea, 

48 


Now,  here  is  what  we  had  in  mmd.  As  I  say,  we  had  to  consider  this  very  hurriedly,  but  the  point  to  which  we  propose 
zu  direct  this  testimony  is  this.     In  your  decision  of  this  morning,  you  use  this  language: 

"This  Board  is  not  insensible,  however,  of  the  fact  that  the  National  Agreements,  rules  and  working  conditions  which 
are  the  subject  matter  of  the  dispute  now  being  heard  by  the  Board  do  affect  the  expenditures  of  the  railroads.  If  any 
of  those  rules  and  working  conditions  are  unjust  and  unreasonable,  they  constitute  an  unwarranted  burden  for  the  railroads 
and  for  the  public." 

Now,  accepting  that,  of  course,  why,  we  want  these  witnesses  subpoenaed  so  that  we  may  interrogate  them.  We 
want  the  gentlemen  here. 

I  thank  you  very  much,  you  certainly  lightened  our  labors  this  morning. 

Mr.  Baker:  I  think  Mr.  Hunt  asked  you  a  question  as  to  what  you  expected  to  prove  by  those  witnesses.  I  do  not 
■recall  that  you  answered  that  question. 

Mr,  Walsh:     Well,  perhaps  I  did  not  make  it  clear. 

Mr.  Baker:     I  would  be  glad  to  know  just  what  you  expect  to  prove  by  them. 

Mr.  Walsh:  What  we  expect  to  prove  by  those  witnesses  is  that  they  have  control  of  the  finances  of  all  of  these  rail- 
road companies;  that  they  are  familiar  with  the  expenditure  of  the  railroads,  and  necessarily  must  be  as  directors. 

■  While  I  would  not  attempt  to  go  into  detail  as  to  their  evidence,  we  expect  to  show  by  them  that  these  rules  and  work- 
ing conditions  have  not — do  not  affect  the  expenditure  of  the  railroads,  and  that  the  rules,  so  far  as  the  expenditures  of 
the  railroads  are  concerned,  are  not  unjust  and  unreasonable,  and  that  they  do  not  consititute  an  unwarranted  burden 
upon  the  railroads  which  they  direct.  * 

,  Mr.  Baker:     That  is  all. 

Mr.  Hunt:  Mr.  Walsh,  does  your  position  take  the  extreme  point  of  declaring  that  no  rule  in  the  National  Agreement 
is  subject  to  any  improvement? 

Mr.  Walsh:  Not  at  all.  Not  at  all.  I  agree  and  urge  that  it  is  the  power  and  the  right  of  this  Board  to  pass 
upon  those — not  only  at  this  time,  but  at  all  times. 

Mr.  Hunt:  You  might  agree,  then,  that  there  were  certain  rules  which  might  operate  in  some  instances  improperly? 

Mr.  Walsh:  I  certainly  would. 

Mr.  Hunt:  Which  improprieties  might  be  corrected  by.  proper  apt  language? 

Mr.  Walsh:  Yes,  sir,  by  modification. 

Mr.  Hunt:  By  modification? 

Mr.  Walsh:  Yes.  I  think  that  is  the  thought  of  those  whom  I  represent.  It  is  my  thought  as  a  citizen  that  it  ought 
to  be  done. 

The  Chairman:     You  have  something  further  you  want  to  offer  this  afternoon,  have  you? 

Mr.  Jewell:     Yes. 

The  Chairman:     It  is  now  so  near  the  adjourning  hour  that  we  will  not  commence  with  anybody  else. 

Mr.  Walsh:     May  I  just  make  one  further  request,  Mr.  Chairman,  before  you  recess? 

The  Chairman:     Yes. 

Mr.  Walsh:     Pardon  me  for  the  interruption. 

The  Chairman:     Yes. 

Mr.  Walsh:     Just  before  you  adjourn. 

The  Chairman:     Yes. 

Mr.  Walsh:  It  has  been  stated  to  us  that  the  Chambers  of  Commerce  of  the  United  States  have  been  sending  resolu' 
tions  to  this  Honorable  Board.     Is  that  correct? 

The  Chairman:  There  have  been  resolutions  from  a  great  man};-  civic  bodies  that  have  been  sent  to  the  Board,  and 
are  on  file  in  the  records  of  the  Board.  There  are  some  resolutions  from  the  Chamber  of  Commerce  of  the  United  States. 
I  think  it  was  particularly  bearing,  as  my  recollection  serves  me — I  am  just  stating  it  from  recollection — on  the  question 
of  being  heard  on  the  formation  and  character  of  adjustment  boards.  There  may  be  some  other  resolutions.  There  have 
been  quite  a  number  of  resolutions  sent  in,  and  they  are  on  file  with  the  Board. 

Mr.  Walsh:  Well,  I  would  not  want  to  make  this  request  in  a  formal  way,  until,  of  course,  we  could  consult  those 
resolutions.     But  the  statement  was  made  that  those  resolutions  went  directly  to  the  heart  of  the  decisions  that  this  Board 

49 


might  be  called  upon  to  make;  for  instance,  asking  the  abolition  of  the  National  Agreements.  I  recognize  that  any  person, 
of  course,  would  have  a  right,  or  any  body,  to  adopt  a  resolution  asking  for  a  hearing  upon  anything,  but  if  such  resolu- 
tions have  been  passed  here — -and  1  will  try  to  have  recourse  to  them — why,  we  will  ask  for  the  President  of  the  Chamber 
of  Commerce  of  the  United  States  to  be  subpoenaed. 

Mr.  Hunt:  Mr.  Walsh,  I  think  you  can  assume  that  the  Board  will  not  be  affected  by  any  resolution  passed  by  any- 
body, but  only  by  the  evidence  before  us  which  is  relevant  to  the  reasonableness  of  the  rules'. 

Mr.  Walsh:  Yes.  Well,  there  is  this  idea.  It  is  difficult  to  get,  I  think,  the  ramifications  of  evidence,  but  there 
is  this  idea — I  believe  that  if  those  gentlemen  are  subpoenaed,  that  the  facts  as  they  view  them  may  differ.  I  think  some 
of  them  will  give  ready  assent  to  the  idea  that  those  rules  as  a  whole  are  wise  and  just  and  reasonable. 

Mr.  Hunt:     That  would  be  their  opinion. 

Mr.  Walsh:     Yes. 

Mr.  Hunt:     Which  would  be  of  no  particular  consequence,  to  some  members  at  least. 

Mr.  Walsh:  Unless  they  were  the  operators  of  the  railroads,  of  course,  who  gave  facts  upon  which  the  opinion  was 
based. 

Now,  to  the  others,  why,  of  course,  we  would  have  to  make  in  an  orderly  way  as  firm  a  defense  against  this  testimony 

as  possible.     And  it  might  become  of  great  relevancy  as  to  what  actuated  the  motives  that  were  behind  them,  whether 

they  had  organized,  for  instance — and  I  do  not  like  to  call  it  a  conspiracy — but  whether  they  had  organized  a  movement, 

regardless  of  the  facts  as  to  whether  those  rules  were  wise  and  just,  and  as  to  whether  they  imposed  a  burden  or  not,  for 

\he  purpose  of  having  them  set  aside,  their  object  being  to  crush  the  unions  as  a  whole. 

That  is  the  plain  statement  of  it.  We  have  a  right — of  course,  we  would  have  a  right  under  certain  circumstances, 
to  show  the  motives  of  witnesses,  and  to  show  anything  that  might  have  occured  to  this  time  that  would  show  that  their 
motive  was  not  to  prevent  evidence  of  the  facts  to  the  Board,  but  to  create  such  a  situation  that  they  could  pursue  their 
main  object  successfully. 

Mr.  Hunt:  Well,  don't  you  think,  in  general,  though,  that  there  is  grave  danger  that  that  course  would  involve  a 
departure  on  the  part  of  the  Board  from  the  main  subject,  and  lead  us  into  all  sorts  of  difficulties  and  by-paths,  which 
would  occasion  loss  of  time  and  the  postponement  of  a  proper  decision? 

Mr.  Walsh:  Well,  I  feel,  of  course,  that  anything  that  the  Board — I  have  that  confidence  in  the  Board  that  tells  me 
that  anything  that  the  Board  thought  was  not  relevant,  they  would  exclude,  but  that  this  is  such  an  important  matter 
that  a  mere  question  of  time,  of  hours  of  time,  or  even  a  few  days'  time,  ought  not  and  would  not  stand  in  the  way  of 
getting  the  truth. 

The  Chairman:  I  want  to  state  that  in  addition  to  whatever  resolutions  are  on  file — and  I  do  not  now  recall  the 
exact  character — from  the  United  States  Chamber  of  Commerce,  there  are  quiet  a  number  from  different  civic  bodies 
and  industrial  organizations  throughout  the  United  States  which  are  on  file,  some  of  which  request  a  hearing  by  their 
representatives  at  this  time. 


They  have  not  been  passed  on  by  the  Board, 
records,  subject  to  the  inspection  of  anybody. 


Those  resolutions  are  on  file  in  the  records  of  the  Board,  and  are  public 


And  as  to  whether  or  not  they  will  be  read  into  the  record  in  the  future,  the  Board  has  not  acted  on  that.  I  take  it 
that  any  kind  of  a  resolution  that  will  come  from  a  reputable  body,  industrial  body  throughout  the  United  States  would 
be  given  due  and  respectful  consideration  as  proper.  They  have  not  so  far  been  made  any  part  of  the  record  of  this  Board 
on  this  hearing.  * 


50 


RETURN     CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT  1  Q  R  ?  ? 

T0»^     202  Main  Library  x>30^^ 


LOAN  PERIOD  1 

2 

3 

HOME  USE 

4 

5 

6 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

Renewals  and  Recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  the  due  date. 

Books  may  be  Renewed  by  calling     642-3405. 


DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 

uoym  mSs 

mm^M23*\ 

0 

FORM  NO.  DD6 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY 
BERKELEY,  CA  94720 


Photomount 

Pamphlet 

Binder 

Gaylord  Bros. 

Makers 

Syracuse,  N.  Y. 

PAT.  JAN  21,  1908 


I 


<^0510S3177 


rf 


5  075  fit: 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


